# EDGAR Filing Document

**Accession Number:** 0001340677
**File Stem:** 0001176256-25-000054
**Filing Date:** 2025-6
**Character Count:** 395849
**Document Hash:** 1d4af6f5bf852c65fe929f8eba073d75
**Contains OCR:** False
**Source Format:** 

## Filing Content

## Filing Summary
**0001176256-25-000054.hdr.sgml**: 20250612

**ACCESSION NUMBER**: 0001176256-25-000054

**CONFORMED SUBMISSION TYPE**: 6-K

**PUBLIC DOCUMENT COUNT**: 97

**CONFORMED PERIOD OF REPORT**: 20250612

**FILED AS OF DATE**: 20250612

**DATE AS OF CHANGE**: 20250612

**FILER**: 

**COMPANY DATA:**
- **COMPANY CONFORMED NAME:** SILVERCORP METALS INC
- **CENTRAL INDEX KEY:** 0001340677
- **STANDARD INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION:** GOLD & SILVER ORES [1040]
- **ORGANIZATION NAME:** 01 Energy & Transportation
- **EIN:** 000000000
- **STATE OF INCORPORATION:** A1
- **FISCAL YEAR END:** 0331

**FILING VALUES:**
- **FORM TYPE:** 6-K
- **SEC ACT:** 1934 Act
- **SEC FILE NUMBER:** 001-34184
- **FILM NUMBER:** 251041777

**BUSINESS ADDRESS:**
- **ADDRESS IS A NON US LOCATION:** YES
- **STREET 1:** SUITE 1750
- **STREET 2:** 1066 W. HASTINGS STREET
- **CITY:** VANCOUVER
- **NON US STATE TERRITORY:** BRITISH COLUMBIA
- **PROVINCE COUNTRY:** A1
- **ZIP:** V6E 3X1
- **BUSINESS PHONE:** 6046699397

**MAIL ADDRESS:**
- **ADDRESS IS A NON US LOCATION:** YES
- **STREET 1:** SUITE 1750
- **STREET 2:** 1066 W. HASTINGS STREET
- **CITY:** VANCOUVER
- **NON US STATE TERRITORY:** BRITISH COLUMBIA
- **PROVINCE COUNTRY:** A1
- **ZIP:** V6E 3X1

------

**UNITED STATES**<br> **SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION**<br> **Washington, D.C. 20549**

**FORM 6-K**

**REPORT OF FOREIGN PRIVATE ISSUER<br>PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-16 OR 15d-16 OF<br> THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934**

**For the month of: <u>June, 2025</u>**

Commission File No. <u>0001-34184</u>

**<u>SILVERCORP METALS INC.</u>**<br> (Translation of registrant's name into English)

**Suite 1750 - 1066 West Hastings Street <br> <u>Vancouver, BC V6E 3X1 CANADA</u>**<br> (Address of principal executive office)

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant files or will file annual reports under cover of Form 20-F or Form 40-F

Form 20-F [ ] Form 40-F [ X ] <br>

------

**SIGNATURE**

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| Dated: June 12, 2025 | **SILVERCORP METALS INC.** |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<u>/s/ Jonathan Hoyles</u> |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Jonathan Hoyles |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;General Counsel and Corporate Secretary |

---

------

**EXHIBIT INDEX**

<u>EXHIBIT</u> <u>DESCRIPTION OF EXHIBIT</u>

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| [99.1](exhibit99-1.htm) | [Technical Report](exhibit99-1.htm) |
| [99.2](exhibit99-2.htm) | [Consent of Qualified Person - Mark Wanless](exhibit99-2.htm) |
| [99.3](exhibit99-3.htm) | [Certificate of Qualified Person - Mark Wanless](exhibit99-3.htm) |

---

------

## Exhibit 99.1

------

**Exhibit 99.1**

Independent Technical Report for the <br> Condor Project, Ecuador

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **Report Prepared for**<br> **Silvercorp Metals Inc.**<br>![](ex99-1_001.jpg)<br>**Report Prepared by**<br> **SRK Consulting (Canada) Inc.**<br>![](ex99-1_002.jpg) | ![](ex99-1_003.jpg) |

---

![](ex99-1_004.jpg)

CAPR003605 ■ May 12, 2025

Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| Silvercorp Metals Inc.<br> Suite 1750-1066 W. Hastings Street<br> Vancouver, BC V6E 3X1<br> Canada |  | SRK Consulting (Canada) Inc.<br> 155 University Avenue, Suite 1500<br> Toronto, ON M5H 3B7<br> Canada |
| +1 416 504 2024<br> <u>https://silvercorpmetals.com/</u> |  | +1 416 601 1445<br> <u>www.srk.com</u> |
| **SRK Project Number: CAPR003605** |  |  |
| **Effective Date: February 28, 2025** |  |  |
| **Signature Date: May 12, 2025** |  |  |
| **Qualified Persons / Authored by:** |  |  |
| *["Original signed"]* | | *["Original signed"]* |
| Mark Wanless, Pr.Sci.Nat<br> Principal Consultant |  | Falong Hu, MBA, BEng, FAusIMM, PMP<br> Principal Consultant |
| *["Original signed"]* |  | *["Original signed"]* |
| Yanfang Zhao (Bonnie), MEng, MAusIMM<br> Principal Consultant |  | Lanliang Niu, Beng, MAusIMM <br> Principal Consultant |

---

**Peer Reviewed by:**

Glen Cole, PGeo, Practice Leader and Principal Consultant (Resource Geology)

**Cover Image(s):**

Image of the Condor Project property sourced from https://silvercorpmetal.com

IMPORTANT NOTICE

This report was prepared as a National Instrument 43-101 Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects Technical Report for Silvercorp Metals Inc. (Silvercorp) by SRK Consulting (Canada) Inc. (SRK). The quality of information, conclusions, and estimates contained herein are consistent with the quality of effort involved in SRK's services. The information, conclusions, and estimates contained herein are based on i) information available at the time of preparation, ii) data supplied by outside sources, and iii) the assumptions, conditions, and qualifications set forth in this report. This report is intended for use by Silvercorp subject to the terms and conditions of its contract with SRK and relevant securities legislation. The contract permits Silvercorp to file this report as a Technical Report with Canadian securities regulatory authorities pursuant to National Instrument 43-101. Except for the purposes legislated under provincial securities law, any other uses of this report by any third party is at that party's sole risk. The responsibility for this disclosure remains with Silvercorp. The user of this document should ensure that this is the most recent Technical Report for the property as it is not valid if a new Technical Report has been issued.

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc.

Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador

**Contents**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| Executive Summary | ix |
| Property Description and Ownership | ix |
| Accessibility, Climate, Physiography, Local Resources and Infrastructure | x |
| History | x |
| Geology and Mineralization | xi |
| Deposit Types | xii |
| Exploration, Quality Assurance and Quality Control | xiii |
| Data Verification | xiv |
| Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing | xiv |
| Mineral Resource Estimates | xvii |
| Interpretation and Conclusions | xix |
| Recommendations | xx |

---

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| 1 | Introduction and Terms of Reference | 1 |
| 1.1 | Scope of Work | 1 |
| 1.2 | Work Program | 2 |
| 1.3 | Basis of Technical Report | 2 |
| 1.4 | Qualifications of SRK and SRK Team | 3 |
| 1.5 | Site Visit | 3 |
| 1.6 | Acknowledgement | 3 |
| 1.7 | Declaration | 3 |
| 2 | Reliance on Other Experts | 5 |
| 3 | Property Description and Location | 6 |
| 3.1 | Property Location | 6 |
| 3.2 | Mineral Tenure | 7 |
| 3.3 | Underlying Agreements | 8 |
| 3.4 | Environmental Regulations and Permitting | 8 |
| 3.5 | Mining Rights in Condor Project | 9 |
| 4 | Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure, and Physiography | 11 |
| 4.1 | Accessibility | 11 |
| 4.2 | Climate | 11 |
| 4.3 | Local Resources and Infrastructure | 12 |
| 4.4 | Physiography | 12 |
| 5 | History | 14 |
| 5.1 | Ownership History | 14 |
| 5.2 | Exploration History | 14 |
| 5.3 | Production | 16 |
| 5.4 | Previous Mineral Resource Estimates | 16 |
| 6 | Geological Setting and Mineralization | 18 |
| 6.1 | Regional Geology | 18 |
| 6.2 | Property Geology | 20 |

---

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 i

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc.

Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| 6.3 | Mineralization | 23.0 |
| 7.0 | Deposit Types | 26.0 |
| 8.0 | Exploration | 27.0 |
| 9.0 | Drilling | 28.0 |
| 9.1 | Historical Drilling (Pre-2019) | 29.0 |
| 9.2 | Luminex Drilling (2019 – 2021) | 30.0 |
| 9.3 | Luminex Drilling (2022 – 2023) | 31.0 |
| 9.4 | Luminex Drilling Procedures | 31.0 |
| 9.5 | Recommendations | 32.0 |
| 10.0 | Sample Preparation, Analyses, and Security | 33.0 |
| 10.1 | Sampling | 33.0 |
| 10.2 | Sample Preparation and Analysis | 34.0 |
| 10.3 | Sample Shipment and Security | 35.0 |
| 10.4 | Bulk Density | 36.0 |
| 10.5 | QAQC | 36.0 |
| 10.6 | Recommendations | 39.0 |
| 11.0 | Data Verification | 40.0 |
| 11.1 | Site Visit | 40.0 |
| 11.2 | Historical Data Validation | 41.0 |
| 11.3 | Analytical Quality Control Data Validation | 42.0 |
| 11.4 | Recommendations and Conclusions | 58.0 |
| 12.0 | Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing | 60.0 |

---

12.1 Introduction 60

12.2 Los Cuyes West 60

12.2.1 Head Assay and Mineral Composition 60

12.2.2 Gravity Concentration 61

12.2.3 Cyanidation 62

12.2.4 Bulk Flotation 64

12.2.5 Concentrate Cyanidation 64

12.2.6 Flotation of Cyanide Leached Bulk Concentrate for Recovery of Silver, Lead and Zinc 66

12.2.7 Flotation of Whole Ore Cyanidation Residue 68

12.3 Camp 68

12.3.1 Head Assay and Mineral Composition 68

12.3.2 Gravity Concentration 70

12.3.3 Cyanidation 70

12.3.4 Bulk Flotation 72

12.3.5 Concentrate Cyanidation 73

12.3.6 Lead and Zinc Flotation of the Cyanide Leached Bulk Concentrate 73

12.3.7 Sequential Selective Flotation of the Whole Ore Cyanide Leach Residue 74

12.4 Soledad 75

12.4.1 Direct Cyanidation 75

12.4.2 Bulk Flotation Followed By Gravity Concentration And Cyanidation Process Options 75

12.4.3 Multi-Stage Gravity Concentration Followed By Cyanidation Options 77

12.5 Enma 79

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 ii

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc.

Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
|  | 12.5.1 | Sample and Head Assay | 79.0 |
|  | 12.5.2 | Whole Ore Cyanidation | 79.0 |
|  | 12.5.3 | Gravity Concentration and Cyanide Leach of Gravity Concentrate | 80.0 |
|  | 12.5.4 | Grindability | 80.0 |
| 12.6 | Conclusion and Recommendation | Conclusion and Recommendation | 81.0 |
| 13.0 | Mineral Resource Estimates | Mineral Resource Estimates | 83.0 |
| 13.1 | Introduction | Introduction | 83.0 |
| 13.2 | Estimation Procedures | Estimation Procedures | 83.0 |
| 13.3 | Resource Database | Resource Database | 84.0 |
| 13.4 | Domain Modelling | Domain Modelling | 84.0 |
|  | 13.4.1 | Camp | 84.0 |
|  | 13.4.2 | Los Cuyes | 86.0 |
|  | 13.4.3 | Soledad | 88.0 |
|  | 13.4.4 | Enma | 89.0 |
| 13.5 | Specific Gravity | Specific Gravity | 90.0 |
| 13.6 | Compositing | Compositing | 91.0 |
|  | 13.6.1 | Camp | 91.0 |
|  | 13.6.2 | Los Cuyes | 93.0 |
|  | 13.6.3 | Soledad | 95.0 |
|  | 13.6.4 | Enma | 96.0 |
| 13.7 | Evaluation of Outliers | Evaluation of Outliers | 98.0 |
|  | 13.7.1 | Camp | 98.0 |
|  | 13.7.2 | Los Cuyes | 98.0 |
|  | 13.7.3 | Soledad | 100.0 |
|  | 13.7.4 | Enma | 100.0 |
| 13.8 | Spatial Continuity Assessment | Spatial Continuity Assessment | 101.0 |
|  | 13.8.1 | Camp | 101.0 |
|  | 13.8.2 | Los Cuyes | 102.0 |
|  | 13.8.3 | Soledad | 104.0 |
|  | 13.8.4 | Enma | 106.0 |
| 13.9 | Block Model and Grade Estimation | Block Model and Grade Estimation | 107.0 |
|  | 13.9.1 | Camp | 107.0 |
|  | 13.9.2 | Los Cuyes | 109.0 |
|  | 13.9.3 | Soledad | 111.0 |
|  | 13.9.4 | Enma | 111.0 |
| 13.1 | Model Validation | Model Validation | 113.0 |
|  | 13.10.1 | Camp | 113.0 |
|  | 13.10.2 | Los Cuyes | 116.0 |
|  | 13.10.3 | Soledad | 120.0 |
|  | 13.10.4 | Enma | 122.0 |
| 13.11 | Mineral Resource Classification | Mineral Resource Classification | 124.0 |
|  | 13.11.1 | Camp | 124.0 |
|  | 13.11.2 | Los Cuyes | 126.0 |
|  | 13.11.3 | Soledad | 129.0 |
|  | 13.11.4 | Enma | 130.0 |
| 13.12 | Mineral Resource Statement | Mineral Resource Statement | 131.0 |
| 13.13 | Grade Sensitivity Analysis | Grade Sensitivity Analysis | 136.0 |
| 13.14 | Previous Mineral Resource Estimate | Previous Mineral Resource Estimate | 143.0 |

---

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 iii

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc.

Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| 14 | Adjacent Properties | 145.0 |
| 15 | Other Relevant Data and Information | 147.0 |
| 16 | Interpretation and Conclusions | 148.0 |
| 17 | Recommendations | 149.0 |
| References | References | 150.0 |
| Appendix | Appendix | 151.0 |

---

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 iv

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc.

Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador

**Tables**

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| Table i: | Cyanidation Test Results Summary - Gold and Silver Extractions | xv |
| Table ii: | Overall Recovery of Bulk Flotation – Concentrate Cyanidation – Residue Flotation | xvi |
| Table iii: | Overall Recovery of Cyanidation - Residue Flotation | xvi |
| Table iv: | Underground Extraction Mineral Resource Statement for Condor Project, as of 28 February 2025 | xviii |
| Table v: | Open Pit Mineral Resource Statement for Condor Project, as of 28 February 2025 | xix |
| Table 3.1: | Condormining Concessions | 9 |
| Table 5.1: | Geochemical Surveys of Condor Project | 15 |
| Table 5.2: | Geophysical Surveys of Condor Project | 16 |
| Table 9.1: | Drilling Programs of Condor Project (Pre-2019) | 30 |
| Table 9.2: | Drilling hole Summary of Condor Project (2022-2023) | 31 |
| Table 10.1: | Condor QAQC Samples During the Period 1994 to 2023 | 37 |
| Table 11.1: | Standards from Inspectorate Services Summary for the Condor Project | 42 |
| Table 11.2: | CRM Reference Value Summary for the Condor Project | 43 |
| Table 11.3: | CRM Usage at the Condor Project | 44 |
| Table 11.4: | Selected CRM Results Summary for the Camp deposit | 45 |
| Table 11.5: | Selected CRM Results Summary for the Los Cuyes deposit | 48 |
| Table 11.6: | Selected CRM Results Summary for the Soledad Deposit | 50 |
| Table 11.7: | Selected CRM Results Summary for the Enma Deposit | 52 |
| Table 11.8: | Blanks Summary for the Condor Project | 53 |
| Table 11.9: | Duplicates Summary for the Condor Project | 54 |
| Table 12.1: | Head Assays for Los Cuyes West and Breccia Pipe Samples | 61 |
| Table 12.2: | Bulk Mineralogy by XRD for Los Cuyes West and Breccia Pipe Samples | 61 |
| Table 12.3: | Gravity Concentration for Master Composite of Los Cuyes and Breccia Pipe | 62 |
| Table 12.4: | Whole Ore Cyanidation Results for Los Cuyes West and Breccia Pipe | 62 |
| Table 12.5: | Bulk Flotation Results for Los Cuyes West and Breccia Pipe | 64 |
| Table 12.6: | Intensive CIL Cyanide Leach of Flotation Concentrate for Los Cuyes West and Breccia Pipe | 65 |
| Table 12.7: | Standard CIL Cyanide Leach of Flotation Concentrate for Los Cuyes West and Breccia Pipe | 65 |
| Table 12.8: | Overall Recovery of Bulk Flotation and Concentrate Cyanidation for Los Cuyes West and Breccia Pipe | 66 |
| Table 12.9: | Results of Bulk Flotation-Cyanidation-Pb Flotation-Zn Flotation | 67 |
| Table 12.10: | Results of Whole Ore Cyanidation and Bulk Flotation of Cyanide Leached Residue of Los Cuyes Master Composite | 68 |
| Table 12.11: | Head Assay Results of the Samples from the Camp Deposit | 69 |
| Table 12.12: | Bulk Mineralogy by XRD for the Samples from the Camp Deposit | 69 |
| Table 12.13: | Gravity Concentration Result for the Master Composite of the Camp Deposit | 70 |
| Table 12.14: | Results of Gravity Tails Cyanidation for the Camp Deposit | 71 |
| Table 12.15: | Test Results of the Whole Ore Cyanide Leach (WOCN) and CIL Cyanide Leach for the Camp Composite samples | 71 |
| Table 12.16: | Bulk Flotation of the Gravity Tails and the Feed Sample for the Camp Deposit | 72 |
| Table 12.17: | Bulk Flotation of the Design of Experiment for the Camp Deposit | 72 |
| Table 12.18: | Cyanidation of the Bulk Flotation Concentrate for the Base Camp | 73 |
| Table 12.19: | Lead and Zinc Flotation of the Cyanide Leached Bulk Concentrate for the Camp Deposit | 74 |
| Table 12.20: | Results of the Whole Ore Cyanidation and Flotation of the Cyanide Leach Residue for the Camp Master Composite | 74 |
| Table 12.21: | WOCN Test Results of San Jose Sample | 75 |
| Table 12.22: | Cyanidation Results of the San Jose Composite Sample | 75 |

---

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 v

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc.

Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| Table 12.23: | Bulk Flotation Test Result of a San Jose Composite Sample | 76 |
| Table 12.24: | Summary Results of Bulk Flotation and Cyanide Leach of the Bulk Concentrate | 76 |
| Table 12.25: | Summary Results of Bulk Flotation, and Gravity Concentration and Cyanidation | 77 |
| Table 12.26: | Results of Multi-Stage Gravity Concentration and Cyanidation Tests | 77 |
| Table 12.27: | Overall Results of Multi-stage Gravity Concentration and Cyanidation | 79 |
| Table 12.28: | Head Assay Result of Enma Master Composite | 79 |
| Table 12.29: | Whole Ore Cyanidation Results of the Enma MC Sample | 80 |
| Table 12.30: | Results of Gravity Concentration of the Enma MC Sample | 80 |
| Table 12.31: | Results of Gravity Concentration-Cyanidation of the Enma MC Sample | 80 |
| Table 12.32: | Summary of Ore Grindability | 81 |
| Table 13.1: | Resource Database Summary for the Condor Project | 84 |
| Table 13.2: | Density Data for Camp and Los Cuyes per Lithology Code | 91 |
| Table 13.3: | Camp Composites For Each Domain | 92 |
| Table 13.4: | Los Cuyes Domain Sample and Composite Au g/t Grades with Residual Sample Grades | 94 |
| Table 13.5: | Los Cuyes Deculstered Average Values for Estimated Variables in Each Domain | 94 |
| Table 13.6: | Soledad Sample and Composite Grades with Residual Sample Grades | 96 |
| Table 13.7: | Soledad Declustered Average Values for Estimated Variables | 96 |
| Table 13.8: | Enma Average Values for Estimated Varaibles | 98 |
| Table 13.9: | Summary of Grade Capping Applied to Camp | 98 |
| Table 13.10: | Summary of Grade Capping Applied to Los Cuyes | 99 |
| Table 13.11: | Summary of Grade Capping Applied to Soledad | 100 |
| Table 13.12: | Summary of Grade Capping Applied to Enma | 100 |
| Table 13.13: | Camp Semi-Variogram Model Parameters | 101 |
| Table 13.14: | Los Cuyes Semi-variogram Model Parameters | 103 |
| Table 13.15: | Soledad semi-variogram model parameters | 105 |
| Table 13.16: | Enma Semi-Variogram Model Parameters | 106 |
| Table 13.17: | Block Model Summary | 107 |
| Table 13.18: | Camp Search Parameters | 108 |
| Table 13.19: | Los Cuyes Search Parameters | 110 |
| Table 13.20: | Soledad Search Parameters | 111 |
| Table 13.21: | Enma Search Parameters | 112 |
| Table 13.22: | Camp per Domain Comparison Between Composites and Estimates | 113 |
| Table 13.23: | Los Cuyes Per Domain Comparison Between Composites and Estimates | 116 |
| Table 13.24: | Soledad Global Comparison Between Composites and Estimates | 121 |
| Table 13.25: | Enma global comparison between composites and estimates | 123 |
| Table 13.26: | Pit Shell Optimization Inputs for RPEEE | 132 |
| Table 13.27: | Cut-off Grade Estimates for the Condor Project | 133 |
| Table 13.28: | Payable Assumption Inputs | 134 |
| Table 13.29: | Weighted Payable Estimates to Los Cuyes and Camp | 134 |
| Table 13.30: | Underground Extraction Mineral Resource Statement for Condor Project, as of 28 February 2025 | 135 |
| Table 13.31: | Open Pit Mineral Resource Statement for Condor Project, as of 28 February 2025 | 135 |
| Table 13.32: | Global Block Model Quantities and Grade Estimates for Indicated and Inferred Category, Camp at Various cut-off Grades | 136 |
| Table 13.33: | Global Block Model Quantities and Grade Estimates for Indicated and Inferred Category, Los Cuyes at Various cut-off Grades | 138 |
| Table 13.34: | Global Block Model Quantities and Grade Estimates for Indicated and Inferred Category, Soledad at Various cut-off Grades | 140 |
| Table 13.35: | Global Block Model Quantities and Grade Estimates for Indicated and Inferred Category, Enma at Various cut-off Grades | 142 |

---

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 vi

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc.

Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| Table 13.36: | Previous Condor Project Mineral Resources for selected projects Effective 28 July 2021 | 144 |
| Table 14.1: | Maynard (2004) Jeruslem Concession Mineral Resources | 146 |
| Table 14.2: | Luminex (2021) Mineral Resource estimate for the Santa Barbara Deposit | 146 |
| Table 17.1: | Proposed Initial Exploration Program for the Condor Project | 149 |

---

**Figures**

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| Figure 3.1: | Location of the Condor Project | 6 |
| Figure 3.2: | Condor Concessions | 7 |
| Figure 4.1: | Access to Condor Project | 11 |
| Figure 4.2: | Typical Landscape in the Condor Project | 13 |
| Figure 6.1: | Regional Geological Map of Condor Project | 19 |
| Figure 6.2: | Property Geology Map of Condor Project | 21 |
| Figure 6.3: | Diagrammatic Cross-section of Los Cuyes, Soledad, and Camp | 22 |
| Figure 6.4: | Condor Volcanogenic Breccia and Dome Complex | 25 |
| Figure 8.1: | 2024 SVM Relogging Program | 27 |
| Figure 9.1: | Condor North Area Drilling Location Map | 28 |
| Figure 9.2: | Condor Central Area Drilling Location Map | 29 |
| Figure 10.1: | Drill Core Photograph and Logging Areas of Condor Project | 34 |
| Figure 10.2: | Core Tray and Sample Storage of Condor Project | 36 |
| Figure 11.1: | Rock Outcrops at the Condor Project | 40 |
| Figure 11.2: | Condor Project Drillhole Sealing Mark | 41 |
| Figure 11.3: | Selected CRMs Performances for the Camp Deposit | 47 |
| Figure 11.4: | Selected CRMs Performances for the Los Cuyes Deposit | 49 |
| Figure 11.5: | Selected CRMs Performances for the Soledad Deposit | 51 |
| Figure 11.6: | Selected Blanks Performances Charts for Au | 53 |
| Figure 11.7: | Coarse Duplicates Scatter and HARD Plot for Gold | 55 |
| Figure 11.8: | Field Duplicates Scatter and HARD Plot for Gold | 56 |
| Figure 11.9: | Pulp Duplicates Scatter and HARD Plot for the gold | 57 |
| Figure 11.10: | Umpire samples Scatter for the Los Cuyes deposit | 58 |
| Figure 12.1: | Gold Leach Curves of WOCN for Los Cuyes West and Breccia Pipe | 63 |
| Figure 12.2: | Silver Leach Curves of WOCN for Los Cuyes West and Breccia Pipe | 63 |
| Figure 12.3: | Flow Diagram for the Bulk Flotation-Cyanidation-Pb Flotation-Zn Flotation | 67 |
| Figure 12.4: | Flowsheet of Bulk Flotation at Coarse Grind Size and Cyanide leach of Bulk Concentrate | 76 |
| Figure 12.5: | Multi-Stage Gravity Concentration and Cyanidation Test Flowsheet | 78 |
| Figure 13.1: | Plan View of Condor Project Geology at Surface | 85 |
| Figure 13.2: | Cross Sections of the Veins CA-01 to CA-06 looking Northwest | 86 |
| Figure 13.3: | Plan View of the Los Cuyes Shear Hosted Mineralization Models | 87 |
| Figure 13.4: | Los Cuyes Vertical Cross Section looking North West | 88 |
| Figure 13.5: | Soledad Deposit 0.2 g/t Constraining Gold Grade Shell | 89 |
| Figure 13.6: | Enma Deposit 0.1 g/t Constraining Gold Grade Shell | 90 |
| Figure 13.7: | Interval Length Histogram for the Camp Deposit | 91 |
| Figure 13.8: | Gold Grades Before and After Compositing (Camp) | 92 |
| Figure 13.9: | Interval Length Histogram of Los Cuyes | 93 |
| Figure 13.10: | Interval Length Histogram of Soledad | 95 |
| Figure 13.11: | Interval Length Histogram for Enma | 97 |
| Figure 13.12: | Before and After Compositing (Enma) | 97 |
| Figure 13.13: | Camp CA-03 Domain Gaussian Space Semi-Variogram Models | 102 |
| Figure 13.14: | Los Cuyes LCW Domain Gaussian Space Semi-variogram Models | 104 |
| Figure 13.15: | Soledad Gaussian Space Semi-variogram Models | 105 |

---

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 vii

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc.

Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| Figure 13.16: | Enma Semi-Variogram Models | 106 |
| Figure 13.17: | Vertical Section of The Camp Ca-03 Domain Gold Distribution Looking North | 114 |
| Figure 13.18: | Camp X Swath Plots for Gold, Silver, Lead and Zinc | 115 |
| Figure 13.19: | Camp Z Swath Plots for Gold, Silver, Lead and Zinc | 115 |
| Figure 13.20: | Vertical Section of the Los Cuyes LCW Domain Gold Distribution Looking North | 117 |
| Figure 13.21: | Los Cuyes X Swath Plots for Gold, Silver and Zinc in the LCW Domain | 118 |
| Figure 13.22: | Los Cuyes Z Swath Plots for Gold, Silver and Zinc in the Halo Domain | 119 |
| Figure 13.23: | Soledad Vertical Cross Section Looking West Showing Gold Grade | 120 |
| Figure 13.24: | Soledad Y and Z Swath Plots for Gold | 121 |
| Figure 13.25: | Enma vertical Cross Section Looking South Showing Gold Grade | 122 |
| Figure 13.26: | Enma X and Z Swath Plots for Gold | 123 |
| Figure 13.27: | Plan Showing Camp Domain CA-03 Classification | 125 |
| Figure 13.28: | Plan Showing Camp Domain CA-05 Classification | 126 |
| Figure 13.29: | Section Showing Los Cuyes Domain NW5 Classification | 127 |
| Figure 13.30: | Section Showing Los Cuyes Domain NW1 Classification | 128 |
| Figure 13.31: | Section Showing Los Cuyes Domain LCW Classification | 129 |
| Figure 13.32: | Section Showing Soledad Indicated Mineral Resource classification | 130 |
| Figure 13.33: | Section Showing Enma Indicated Mineral Resource Classification | 131 |
| Figure 13.34: | Camp Deposit Global Grade Tonnage Curve | 137 |
| Figure 13.35: | Los Cuyes Deposit Global Grade Tonnage Curve | 139 |
| Figure 13.36: | Soledad Deposit Global Grade Tonnage Curve | 141 |
| Figure 13.37: | Enma Deposit Global Grade Tonnage Curve | 143 |
| Figure 14.1: | Plan Map – Chinapintza Veins – Jerusalem Concession | 145 |

---

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 viii

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Executive Summary**

**Introduction**

Silvercorp Metals Inc. (Silvercorp, SVM, the Company or the Client) commissioned SRK Consulting (Canada) Inc (SRK) to undertake an independent technical review of the Condor project (the Condor Project or the Project) located in Ecuador. The deliverable of this Project is a National Instrument 43- 101 compliant Independent Technical Report with an independent and unbiased view of the Project which will enable potential equity investors and possible future shareholders to review the Project's operations.

The Condor Project consists of the Condor North area, the Condor Central area and the Condor South area. The Condor North area consists of the deposits at Los Cuyes, Soledad, Enma, Camp, and the Prometedor Prospect. The Condor Central area consists of the copper-gold and copper-molybdenum porphyries at Santa Barbara and El Hito. The Condor South area consists of the newly identified Nayumbi Prospect.

The Condor Project in this report refers to the Los Cuyes, Soledad, Enma and Camp deposits in the Condor North area.

The Report documents an updated Mineral Resource estimate for the Los Cuyes, Soledad, Enma and Camp Deposits following the guidelines of the Canadian Securities Administrators' National Instrument 43-101 and Form 43-101 F1 (the "NI 43-101 Standard") and in conformity with the generally accepted Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (the CIM)'s Definition Standards and the "Estimation of Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves Best Practice Guidelines" (2019).

**Property Description and Ownership**

The Condor Project is located in the Province of Zamora-Chinchipe, near the Ecuador-Peru border and the southern end of the Cordillera del Condor. The Project is approximately 400 km south-southeast of Quito, 149 km east of the city of Loja, and 76 km east of the town of Zamora.

The ownership history of the Condor Project began with artisanal and small-scale miners operating in the area pre-1988. In 1988, modern exploration commenced through a joint venture between ISSFA and Prominex UK. This partnership lasted until 1991 when Prominex UK withdrew, and in 1993, TVX Gold, Inc. (TVX) and Chalupas Mining joined the venture. They remained involved until 2000, after which Goldmarca (formerly Hydromet Technologies Ltd.) formed a new joint venture with ISSFA in 2002. Goldmarca was rebranded to Ecometals Ltd. in 2007 and continued operations until the Ecuadorian government imposed a moratorium on mineral exploration from April 2008 to November 2009. In 2010, Ecometals sold its interest to Ecuador Capital, which was later renamed Ecuador Gold and Copper Corp. (EGX). Lumina Gold Corp (Lumina) acquired EGX in 2016, and in 2018, Lumina spun out Luminex Resources Corp. (Luminex), leading to the Condor Project being 90% owned by Condormining, a Luminex subsidiary, with ISSFA retaining a 10% stake. However, ISSFA has made no funding contribution to the continuing operation of the project; consequently, its share has been diluted

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 ix

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

to 1.3% to date. In January 2024, Adventus Mining Corporation (Adventus) merged with Luminex. In July 2024, Silvercorp acquired Adventus and assumed the ownership of the Condor Project.

**Accessibility, Climate, Physiography, Local Resources and Infrastructure**

Access to the project is provided by paved and gravel roads. The climate in the Project area is highland tropical, with an average daily temperature ranging from 21°C to 24°C, and an average annual rainfall of approximately 2,000 mm to 3,000 mm. There is a distinct annual rainy season that typically occurs between January and June.

The city of Loja (population ~181,000) is the largest regional centre in the area of the Project and will be a major source of basic goods and services for advanced phases of exploration as well as mine construction and operation. Initial estimates indicate that the national electric grid is capable of providing all necessary power to the Project. Current infrastructure at the Condor Project consists of a fully equipped 70-man exploration camp, located at 1,456 masl directly above the Camp deposit. The camp consists of dormitories, canteen, medical clinic, administrative offices, warehouse, emergency generator, water treatment plant, septic system, diesel storage tanks and fuelling station, a meteorological station, various security installations, and a large core logging and storage facility.

Ancillary core storage, warehousing, and waste segregation/accumulation facilities are also located near the camp. The camp is connected to the national grid and has full internet and cellular telephone access. The Congüime River and numerous smaller streams and springs within the Project concessions can serve as sources of water for all anticipated mining, mineral processing, potable usage, and other Project requirements.

The Project is located in steep, high-relief terrain, near the southern end of the Cordillera del Condor. Elevations range between 960 m and 1,830 m above sea level. The Condor Project area is subject to frequent landslides and mudflows, due to the steepness of terrain, underlying geology, periodically extreme precipitation events, and the accumulated exacerbating impacts of illegal mining clearances.

**History**

The exploration of the Condor Project area has been extensive and spans several decades.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ From 1988 to 1991, ISSFA and Prominex UK conducted regional
stream sediment sampling and geological mapping.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**■** After TVX Gold, Inc. (TVX) and Chalupas withdrew in 2000, Goldmarca
/ Ecometals took over and continued with reconnaissance mapping, IP and magnetic surveys, and drilling 154 holes totaling 33,323m from
2002 to 2008.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ The exploration halted due to a moratorium imposed from April
2008 to November 2009. Resuming in 2012, EGX focused on geological mapping, rock sampling, and diamond drilling 37 holes totaling 22,052m
until 2016.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 x

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Under Lumina Gold Corp from 2016 to 2018, the Project saw additional
mapping, sampling, and geophysical surveys, leading to the drilling of nine holes totaling 1,907m.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Since 2018, Luminex Resources Corp. has continued these efforts,
conducting a property-wide airborne ZTEM geophysical survey and drilling 46 holes totaling 23,211m at the Camp deposit.

Despite extensive exploration efforts, the Condor Project has not yet achieved commercial mineral production. However, artisanal mining has been a significant activity in the area since the 1980s.

**Geology and Mineralization**

The Condor Project is located in the Cordillera del Condor in the Zamora copper-gold metallogenic belt. The Project area comprises epithermal gold-silver, porphyry copper-gold ±molybdenum, and numerous alluvial gold deposits.

The Condor Project's geology is both diverse and complex, particularly in the Condor North area. This region is characterized by distinctive low- to intermediate-sulphidation epithermal vein swarms located in the northern part. These vein swarms form a series of north-northwest-striking, narrow, high-grade gold and electrum-bearing manganoan carbonate veins, often accompanied by base metals and hosted in dacite porphyry. The Condor breccia, dyke, and dome complex is further divided into four main zones: Camp, Los Cuyes, Soledad and Enma. Gold-silver mineralization in these zones is linked with sphalerite-pyrite/marcasite veins, which typically occur within breccias, along the contacts of rhyolite dykes, and as replacements and disseminations. These veins are often disrupted by post- mineral extensional faults.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 xi

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Camp**: The Camp deposit features gold and silver mineralization linked to a swarm of northwest- striking rhyolite-dacite dykes, likely originating from a larger buried rhyolite intrusion. These dykes are concentrated at the contact between a volcanic/intrusive complex and a major granodiorite intrusion. The mineralized zone, dipping steeply at 85° to the northeast, extends over 700 m along strike and is 200 m wide. Gold occurs within veins containing pyrite, marcasite, iron-rich sphalerite (marmatite), galena, ± chalcopyrite, pyrrhotite, quartz, and rhodochrosite gangue. Host rocks include altered granodiorites, breccias, flow-banded rhyolite, and phreatomagmatic breccia. The area is capped by 30 to 80 m of trachyte to rhyolitic welded tuff, with the Camp ridge bounded by the Camp Fault and Piedras Blancas Fault.

**Los Cuyes**: Los Cuyes is hosted within an oval-shaped diatreme measuring 450 m northeast- southwest, 300 m northwest-southeast, and extending to at least 350 m in depth. This diatreme, resembling an inverted cone plunging approximately 50° to the southeast, consists of an outer shell of polymictic phreatomagmatic breccia and an internal fill of well-sorted rhyolitic lapilli tuffs, breccias, and volcanic sandstones. Amphibolite and quartz arenite fragments occur around its periphery, with dacite and rhyolite ring dykes intruding the steep margins. Lithological contacts, such as dykes cutting through the diatreme and its outer breccia shell, favoured vein development. The mineralization and alteration at Los Cuyes post-date all local rock types, including blocks of the Hollín Formation, indicating that the mineralization is post-Early Cretaceous.

**Soledad**: The Soledad Zone features a 700-meter diameter oval-shaped rhyolite intrusion within the Zamora Batholith, surrounded by discontinuous pyritic breccias. The overall mineralization at Soledad is described as a north-south elongated wine glass-shaped body, tapering between 200 to 300 m below the surface and extending approximately 110 m northwest by 50 m northeast. Sphalerite transitions to pyrite as the dominant sulphide at around 100 m below the surface, leading to diminished gold and silver grades similar to Los Cuyes.

**Enma**: Gold and silver mineralization at Enma is hosted in a west-northwest-trending rhyolitic breccia that occurs at the contact between andesite lapilli tuffs and the Zamora batholith. The deposit has dimensions of 280 m east-northeast, is approximately 20 to 75 m wide, and has a vertical extent of 350 m. Alteration mineralogy is primarily chlorite with minor quartz-sericite ± alunite-kaolinite. Gold is associated with pyrite-sphalerite-quartz and locally rhodochrosite veins. At depths greater than 200 m, gold-poor, pyrite-pyrrhotite ± chalcopyrite veins are more dominant.

**Deposit Types**

Camp, Los Cuyes, Soledad and Enma Deposits are consistent with low- to intermediate sulphidation epithermal mineralization. Characteristics of such deposits are:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Occur at convergent plate settings, typically in calc-alkaline
volcanic arcs.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**■** Form at shallow depths (<2 km) from near-neutral pH, sulfur-poor
hydrothermal fluids, often of meteoric origin, with metals derived from underlying porphyry intrusions.

allows for mineralized fluids to permeate, with gold precipitated by boiling.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 xii

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Sub-types include sulphide-poor deposits with rhyolites, sulphide-rich
deposits with andesites/rhyodacites, and sulphide-poor deposits with alkali rocks.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Hydrothermal alteration is zoned and subtle, characterized by
sericite, illite, smectite, and carbonate.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Features quartz, quartz-carbonate, and carbonate veins with
various textures.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Sulphide content varies (1-20%), typically <5%, with pyrite,
sphalerite, galena, and low copper (chalcopyrite).

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ High gold, silver, arsenic, antimony, mercury, zinc, lead, selenium,
and low copper, tellurium.

**Exploration, Quality Assurance and Quality Control**

Since 1994, the Condor Project has undergone extensive drilling by various operators. The drilling campaigns of Condor Project from 1994 to 2023, totalling 538 holes with 157,312 meters, focused primarily on the Condor North Area and Condor Central Area.

No QAQC data are available for the TVX Gold, Inc. (TVX) drilling programme.

From 2004 to August 2007, the Certified Reference Materials (CRMs or standards Standards), blanks and quarter core duplicate samples were used on the Project. The QAQC procedure from July 2007 to 2011 involved inserting a blank every 6 samples, a standard after 7 samples, a duplicate after 6 samples, followed by another blank. Checks by SRK indicate that this methodology was not strictly adhered to in terms of the number of blanks and standards. From July 2007, OREAS standards and blanks were used, mine waste material was no longer used.

During the Goldmarca / Ecuador Gold and Copper Corp. (EGX) drill programs from 2012 to 2014, CRMS, blanks and quarter core duplicate sample were inserted after every 20 samples as part of the QAQC procedure.

Quality control failures for programs from 2012–2015 were addressed with programs of remedial assay analysis.

During the 2017–2018 drill program, QAQC samples are inserted after every six core samples. These include three certified standards (high, medium and low gold grades), a blank, and a coarse duplicate.

During the 2019–2021 drill program, QAQC samples are inserted with the insert rate about 2% - 4% for each type, including the certified standards, blank, coarse duplicate and fine duplicates.

The author considers that quality control measures adopted for assaying of the Condor Mineral Resource drilling have established that the assaying is representative and free of any biases or other factors that may materially impact the reliability of the analytical results. The author considers that the sample preparation, security and analytical procedures adopted for Condor drilling provide an adequate basis for the current Mineral Resource estimates.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 xiii

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Data Verification**

SRK conducted a site inspection of the Condor Project from June 19 to 20, 2024. The inspection was led by Principal Geologist Mark Wanless (QP) from SRK Canada, Falong, Hu (Principal Mining Consultant) and Yanfang Zhao (Principal Geologist) from SRK China, who carried out a series of verification steps. These included a thorough examination of the Project area, meetings with company representatives, and discussions with geologists regarding sample collection, preparation, storage, and QAQC procedures. The team also reviewed geological interpretations, inspected outcrops, mineralization, and fault structures, and verified drillhole sealing marks. Additionally, they visually checked stratigraphy against interpreted drilling sections and visited the drill core storage facility and core catalog room to assess the company's core storage protocols and procedures.

The QP was provided the database named CN_DH_Export_Database_8Sept2023.xlsx which covers the QAQC data for several deposits from 1994 to 2023. A review of historical QAQC data was conducted by SRK.

Based on SRK's site visit, review of the previous and ongoing exploration datasets, communication with the Condor's technical personnel and consideration of the mineralization characteristics of the deposit, SRK is satisfied with the quality and result of the sample preparation and assay conducted by related analytical laboratories. The analytical procedures are consistent with generally accepted industry practices and the primary sample results are therefore suitably reliable for use in Mineral Resource estimation.

**Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing**

Mineralization of Los Cuyes, Camp, Soledad (San Jose) and Enma deposits comprise gold and silver with low-level base metal sulphides of copper, lead and zinc. The recovery target metals are gold and silver as dore by gravity concentration and cyanide leach, as well as copper, lead and zinc as flotation concentrates when their contents are high enough for economic recovery.

Cyanide leaching tests were conducted on all four deposit samples, including standard whole ore cyanidation (WOCN), carbon in leach (CIL) and gravity plus concentrate intensive cyanidation and tails WOCN. The results are summarised in Table i. All the samples from four deposits are amenable to WOCN, and there is no preg-robbing effect. For a San Jose sample with 2.72 g/t gold and 26.7 g/t, grind size of 90% passing 75 µm, and leaching for 72 hours, the gold and silver extractions reached 91.6% and 82.0%, respectively. For an Enma ore sample with 0.97 g/t gold and 36.8 g/t silver, grind size of 80% passing 75 µm, and leaching for 24 hours, the gold and silver extractions reached 74.2% and 67.9%, respectively.

The bulk rougher flotation was also investigated with the bulk concentrate being cyanide leached samples of Los Cuyes, Camp and San Jose. The cyanide leached bulk concentrate was floated again to produce the silver/lead concentrate and silver/zinc concentrate. The results are shown in Table ii. Overall gold recoveries of flotation and concentrate cyanide leach were 90.2% to 91.5% for Los Cuyes and 92.6% for Camp. The flotation of the concentrate cyanide leach residues likely produced saleable lead concentrate and zinc concentrate in some cases, depending on the feed grade and flotation operating conditions. The tests obtained a saleable zinc concentrate and a silver/lead concentrate for

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 xiv

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

the Los Cuyes samples, only a saleable lead/silver concentrate for the Camp sample. The San Jose sample at Soledad has not obtained a satisfied bulk flotation result likely due to overly coarse grind size. Enma has not been tested yet on bulk flotation. The bulk flotation and then concentrate cyanide leach followed by selective flotation to produce the silver/lead concentrate and zinc concentrate is a capital cost effective flowsheet, it can comprehensively recover the residual gold and silver from the cyanide residue. However, the overall gold recovery may be somewhat compromised, and the management of process waters will be complicated, because any residual cyanide in the process water will reduce gold recovery during flotation. Optimization test work of this flowsheet should be carried out on all the deposits.

Since gold and silver in the mineralized materials are easily cyanide leachable, in order to obtain a higher gold and silver recovery, the process flowsheet of cyanidation followed by flotation of the cyanide residue has also been preliminarily tested. The overall results are summarized in Table iii. This process flowsheet can achieve higher gold and silver recoveries than the process of bulk flotation – bulk concentrate cyanidation – cyanide residue separate flotation and does not have the issue of residual cyanide in the process water on gold recovery. Although the capital cost is higher, it is recommended that the detailed cyanide residue flotation tests be carried out on all of the master composite samples (MC) from the four deposits to demonstrate whether the marketable lead and zinc concentrates can be produced and to determine overall recoveries for gold, silver, lead, zinc and copper. A trade-off study between the two process flowsheets should be conducted during the next technical study phase.

**Table i: Cyanidation Test Results Summary - Gold and Silver Extractions**

---

| | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Composite** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**WOCN** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**WOCN** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**CIL** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**CIL** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Gravity+WOCN** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Gravity+WOCN** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Composite** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Au** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Ag** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Au** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Ag** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Au** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Ag** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Camp-Low Grade<sup>1</sup> | &nbsp;&nbsp;91.8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;49.5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;92.1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;41.5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;92.9 | &nbsp;&nbsp;45.6 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Camp-Med Grade<sup>1</sup> | &nbsp;&nbsp;96.5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;43.3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;98.0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;39.7 | &nbsp;&nbsp;96.9 | &nbsp;&nbsp;43.9 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Camp-High Grade<sup>1</sup> | &nbsp;&nbsp;96.0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;43.3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;97.0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;48.5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;96.0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;43.3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Los Cuyes-Low Grade<sup>1</sup> | &nbsp;&nbsp;87.5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;27.2 |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Los Cuyes-Med Grade<sup>1</sup> | &nbsp;&nbsp;90.8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;37.5 |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Los Cuyes-High Grade<sup>1</sup> | &nbsp;&nbsp;87.9 | &nbsp;&nbsp;57.4 |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Los Cuyes-Master<sup>1</sup> | &nbsp;&nbsp;87.1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;49.4 | &nbsp;&nbsp;89.1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;47.7 | &nbsp;&nbsp;85.9 | &nbsp;&nbsp;54.5 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Enma-Master<sup>1</sup> | &nbsp;&nbsp;74.2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;67.9 |  |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;71.5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;67.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;San Jose<sup>2</sup> | &nbsp;&nbsp;91.6 | &nbsp;&nbsp;82.0 |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;San Jose Master<sup>3</sup> | &nbsp;&nbsp;72.6 | &nbsp;&nbsp;43.3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;63.4 | &nbsp;&nbsp;40.3 |  |  |

---

Note: <sup>1</sup> grind size P80=75µm, leaching time 24 hours <br> <sup>2</sup> grind size P90=75µm, leaching time 72 hours <br> <sup>3</sup> grind size P80=106µm, leaching time 48 hours

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 xv

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Table ii: Overall Recovery of Bulk Flotation – Concentrate Cyanidation – Residue Flotation**

---

| | | | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | | | | **Grade** | **Grade** | **Recovery (%)** | **Recovery (%)** | **Recovery (%)** | **Recovery (%)** | **Recovery (%)** | **Recovery (%)** |
| <br>**Parameter** | <br>**Weight<br> %** | <br>**Au<br> g/t** | <br>**Au<br> g/t** | **Cu<br> %** | **Pb<br> %** | **Zn<br> %** | **Au** | **Ag** | **Cu** | **Pb** | **Zn** |
| **Los Cuyes - Low Grade** | **Los Cuyes - Low Grade** | **Los Cuyes - Low Grade** |  |  |  | | |  |  |  |  |
| Bulk Conc | 10.2 | 8.40 | 104.8 |  | 0.39 | 2.57 | 95.2 | 85.7 |  | 81.6 | 58.5 |
| Bullion |  |  |  |  |  |  | **90.2** | **54.4** |  |  |  |
| Ag/Pb Conc. | 0.08 |  | 1 ,748 |  | 23.19 | 10.69 |  | **10.3** |  | 38.8 | 2.1 |
| Zn Conc | 0.31 |  | 127.8 |  | 0.90 | **49.00** |  | 2.9 |  | 5.8 | **36.7** |
| Overall Recovery - bullion plus saleable concentrate | Overall Recovery - bullion plus saleable concentrate | Overall Recovery - bullion plus saleable concentrate | Overall Recovery - bullion plus saleable concentrate | Overall Recovery - bullion plus saleable concentrate | Overall Recovery - bullion plus saleable concentrate |  | **90.2** | **64.7** |  |  | **36.7** |
| **Los Cuyes - High Grade** | **Los Cuyes - High Grade** | **Los Cuyes - High Grade** | **Los Cuyes - High Grade** | **Los Cuyes - High Grade** | **Los Cuyes - High Grade** |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| Bulk Conc | 13.9 | 28.67 | 256.1 |  | 1.25 | 4.77 | 95 | 87.4 |  | 83.9 | 71 .9 |
| Bullion |  |  |  |  |  |  | **91.5** | **46.1** |  |  |  |
| Ag/Pb Conc | 0.21 |  | 2653 |  | 32.33 | 9.66 |  | 12.7 |  | 38.6 | 2.2 |
| Zn Conc | 0.67 |  | 161.3 |  | 0.94 | **45.18** |  | 2.5 |  | 3.6 | **32.6** |
| Overall Recovery - bullion plus saleable concentrate | Overall Recovery - bullion plus saleable concentrate | Overall Recovery - bullion plus saleable concentrate | Overall Recovery - bullion plus saleable concentrate | Overall Recovery - bullion plus saleable concentrate | Overall Recovery - bullion plus saleable concentrate |  | **91.5** | **58.8** |  |  | **32.6** |
| **Base Camp** | **Base Camp** |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| Bulk Conc | 14.4 | 32.1 | 187 |  | 1 | 5.6 | 98.5 | 96.3 |  | 94.5 | 78.8 |
| Bullion |  |  |  |  |  |  | **92.6** | **50.3** |  |  |  |
| Ag/Pb Conc | 0.04 | 1.01 | 3324 |  | **52.4** | 3.86 | 0.01 | **6.45** |  | **23.4** | 0.16 |
| Zn Conc | 0.14 | 0.83 | 316.7 |  | 4.28 | 2.32 | 0.05 | 2.31 |  | 7.28 | 0.39 |
| Overall Recovery - bullion plus saleable concentrate | Overall Recovery - bullion plus saleable concentrate | Overall Recovery - bullion plus saleable concentrate | Overall Recovery - bullion plus saleable concentrate | Overall Recovery - bullion plus saleable concentrate | Overall Recovery - bullion plus saleable concentrate | Overall Recovery - bullion plus saleable concentrate | **92.6** | **56.7** |  | **23.4** |  |

---

**Table iii: Overall Recovery of Cyanidation - Residue Flotation**

---

| | | | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | | | | **Grade** | **Grade** | | | | **Recovery (%)** | **Recovery (%)** | |
| <br>**Parameter** | <br>**Weight%** | <br>**Au**<br> **g/t** | <br>**Ag**<br> **g/t** | **Cu**% | **Pb%** | <br>**Zn%** | <br>**Au** | <br>**Ag** | **Cu** | **Pb** | <br>**Zn** |
| **Los Cuyes - Low Grade** |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| <br> Bullion |  |  |  |  |  |  | **87.1** | **49.4** |  |  |  |
| Cu/Pb Conc | 0.1 | **3.81** | **650** | 5.88 | 16.2 | 0.49 | **0.78** | **18.6** | 34.9 | 61.9 | 0.6 |
| Overall Recovery - bullion plus saleable concentrate | Overall Recovery - bullion plus saleable concentrate | Overall Recovery - bullion plus saleable concentrate | Overall Recovery - bullion plus saleable concentrate | Overall Recovery - bullion plus saleable concentrate | Overall Recovery - bullion plus saleable concentrate |  | 87.1 | 49.4 |  |  |  |
| **Camp** |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| <br> Bullion |  |  |  |  |  |  | **95.7** | <br>**44.6** |  |  |  |
| Ag/Pb Conc | 0.1 | **3.28** | **3348** | 0.8 | 44.2 | 20 | **0.08** | **12.3** | 2.6 | **38.1** | 2.4 |
| Zn Conc | 1.3 | **2.52** | **218.7** | 1.37 | 1 | 45.3 | **0.68** | **8.7** | 47.7 | 9.3 | **59.7** |
| Overall Recovery - bullion plus saleable concentrate | Overall Recovery - bullion plus saleable concentrate | Overall Recovery - bullion plus saleable concentrate | Overall Recovery - bullion plus saleable concentrate | Overall Recovery - bullion plus saleable concentrate | Overall Recovery - bullion plus saleable concentrate | Overall Recovery - bullion plus saleable concentrate | 96.5 | 65.6 |  |  |  |

---

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 xvi

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Mineral Resource Estimates**

Condor Project comprises several deposits, however this section only focuses on the Camp, Los Cuyes, Soledad and Enma deposits in the Condor North area, which are included in the Mineral Resources estimation.

The Mineral Resource estimation work of Condor Project was completed by SRK in 2025. The estimates are based on drilling samples information available up to 2023. The QP believes the drilling information is sufficiently reliable to interpret with confidence the boundaries for the deposits and that the assay data are sufficiently reliable to support Mineral Resource estimation. Mr Mark Wanless (Pr.Sci.Nat, FGSSA), and Ms Yanfang Zhao (MAusIMM), who are Principal Geologists from SRK have reviewed the drillhole database, geological model and the mineralisation domains generated by SVM, made some adjustment, performed the grade estimation, classified the Mineral Resources and prepared the Mineral Resource estimate using Datamine, Isatis.Neo and Leapfrog Geo and Edge.

The Qualified Person responsible for the Mineral Resources is Mr Mark Wanless, who is a full time employee of SRK Consulting (Canada) Inc. (SRK Canada) and registered with the South African Council for Natural Scientific Professionals as Pr.Sci.Nat, 400178/05, Fellow of the Geological Society of South Africa, Member of the Geostatistical Association of South Africa and a Member of the South African Institute for Mining and Metallurgy (SAIMM). Mr. Mark Wanless visited the Condor Project between the 19th and 20th of June 2024.

The Mineral Resources have been estimated in accordance with generally accepted CIM Definition Standards and are reported in accordance with the Stock Exchange listing requirements.

The Company considered future operation on Soledad and Enma using surface mining. However at Camp and Los Cuyes the Company plans underground mining due to the steep terrain conditions, relative complexity, high grade tabular mineralization, and that the surface infrastructure might best be located in Camp and/or Los Cuyes area.

The optimization parameters reflect a conventional open pit operation although the cost and revenue assumptions on Soledad and Enma used are not related to any mine plan or financial analysis, they were used only to define the reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction (RPEEE) envelope, and the figures were derived from the current information.

For the higher-grade and thicker tabular domains at Camp and Los Cuyes, there is the opportunity of using a bulk mining method such as long hole open stoping for underground extraction. The thinner tabular domains at Camp and Los Cuyes require using more selective mining methods such as short hole shrinkage and/or cut and fill methods. The Company has extensive experience on selective mining methods and advised that they would like to consider a selective method as the primary approach. Therefore, a breakeven cut-off grade was calculated to determine the subset of the estimated blocks that can be economically exploited using shrinkage or cut and fill mining.

The commodity prices are sourced from an independent analyst, Consensus Market Forecast (CMF) for gold, silver, lead, and zinc. The projected outlook (in real USD) was issued by CMF in February 2025. The long-term prices were used for the consideration of the Reasonable Prospect for Eventual Economic Extraction (RPEEE).

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 xvii

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

Within the current mining license area, as of 31 December 2024, Mineral Resources are reported for the Condor Project, above a COG of 2.2 g/t gold equivalent for Camp and Los Cuyes which are amenable to underground extraction, and 0.6 g/t and 0.5 g/t gold equivalent for Enma and Soledad respectively which are amenable for open pit extraction.

For the open pit deposits, the Mineral Resource is constrained by a conceptual pit, designed using Whittle software. For the underground mineral Resources, SRK used a Mineable Shapes Optimiser (MSO) to outline areas of the mineralization domain that have suitable continuity and grade to sustain underground mining operations. SVM intend using a highly selective mining method (shrinkage or cut and fill) for which the MSO process is not well suited. Therefore, SRK reported the underground Mineral Resources using only a cut off value and excluding small and isolated areas which are unlikely to be practically extractable. The summary of the estimated Mineral Resources is shown in Table iv for Mineral Resources with underground mining potential, and in in Table v for Mineral Resources with open pit mining potential.

**Table iv: Underground Extraction Mineral Resource Statement for Condor Project, as of 28 February 2025**

---

| | | | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | | **Average Grade** | **Average Grade** | **Average Grade** | **Average Grade** | **Average Grade** | **Contained Metal** | **Contained Metal** | **Contained Metal** | **Contained Metal** | **Contained Metal** |
| **Deposit** | **Tonnes**<br>**(Mt)** | **AuEq**<br>**(g/t)** | **Au**<br>**(g/t)** | **Ag**<br>**(g/t)** | **Pb**<br>**(%)** | **Zn**<br>**(%)** | **AuEq**<br>**(koz)** | **Au**<br>**(koz)** | **Ag**<br>**(koz)** | **Pb**<br>**(lb'000)** | **Zn**<br>**(lb'000)** |
| **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** |
| Camp | 2.45 | 3.44 | 3.17 | 18.68 | 0.08 | 0.73 | 271 | 250 | 1471 | 4355 | 39454 |
| Los<br> Cuyes | 0.72 | 4.04 | 3.82 | 22.9 | 0.09 | 0.63 | 93 | 88 | 528 | 1366 | 9966 |
| **Total** | **3.17** | **3.58** | **3.32** | **19.63** | **0.08** | **0.71** | **365** | **338** | **1999** | **5721** | **49420** |
| **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** |
| Camp | 7.9 | 3.38 | 3.07 | 20.59 | 0.08 | 0.89 | 859 | 780 | 5229 | 13271 | 154944 |
| Los <br> Cuyes | 4.2 | 4.71 | 4.47 | 24.64 | 0.12 | 0.53 | 636 | 603 | 3327 | 10741 | 49278 |
| **Total** | **12.1** | **3.84** | **3.55** | **22.00** | **0.09** | **0.77** | **1495** | **1383** | **8556** | **24012** | **204222** |

---

Sources: SRK 2025

Notes: Mineral resources are reported above an underground extraction economic cut off value for Camp and Los Cuyes. Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves and do not have demonstrated economic viability. All figures are rounded to reflect the relative accuracy of the estimate.

The resource statement does not include mineralization in the Halo domain of the Los Cuyes, and its economic potential remains to be further investigated in future studies.

Underground Mineral Resources are reported at a cut-off grade of 2.2 g/t AuEq at Camp and Los Cuyes. Underground cut off grades have been determined using a gold price of USD/oz 2,200, silver price of USD/oz 27, zinc price of USD/t 2,650 and lead price of USD/t 1,950.

1 troy ounce = 31.1034768 metric grams.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 xviii

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Table v: Open Pit Mineral Resource Statement for Condor Project, as of 28 February 2025**

---

| | | | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | | **Average Grade** | **Average Grade** | **Average Grade** | **Average Grade** | **Average Grade** | **Contained Metal** | **Contained Metal** | **Contained Metal** | **Contained Metal** | **Contained Metal** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Deposit | Tonnes | AuEq | Au | Ag | Pb | Zn | AuEq | Au | Ag | Pb | Zn |
|  | (Mt) | (g/t) | (g/t) | (g/t) | (%) | (%) | (koz) | (koz) | (koz) | (lb'000) | (lb'000) |
| **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Soledad | 4.03 | 1.14 | 1.06 | 7.05 | 0.05 | 0.56 | 148 | 138 | 912 | 4365 | 49882 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Enma | 0.03 | 1.05 | 0.97 | 7.11 | 0.07 | 0.30 | 1 | 1 | 7 | 46 | 214 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Total** | **4.06** | **1.14** | **1.06** | **7.05** | **0.05** | **0.56** | **149** | **139** | **920** | **4411** | **50097** |
| **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Soledad | 14.15 | 0.83 | 0.76 | 5.86 | 0.04 | 0.51 | 375 | 346 | 2664 | 12819 | 158009 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Enma | 0.02 | 0.74 | 0.56 | 16.07 | 0.06 | 0.20 | 1 | 0 | 12 | 33 | 103 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Total** | **14.17** | **0.82** | **0.76** | **5.87** | **0.04** | **0.51** | **376** | **347** | **2676** | **12851** | **158112** |

---

Sources: SRK 2025

Notes: Mineral resources are reported in relation to a conceptual pit shell for Soledad and Enma. Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves and do not have demonstrated economic viability. All figures are rounded to reflect the relative accuracy of the estimate.

Open pit Mineral Resources are reported at a cut-off grade of 0.6 g/t AuEq for Enma and 0.5 g/t AuEq for Soledad. Open pit optimizations have been determined using a gold price of USD/oz 2,200, silver price of USD/oz 27, zinc price of USD/t 2,650 and lead price of USD/t 1,950.

1 troy ounce = 31.1034768 metric grams.

**Interpretation and Conclusions**

SVM has reviewed, re-logged, and remodelled the mineralization at the Condor Project. At the Los Cuyes and Camp deposits the updated model of mineralization has included identification of several high-grade tabular domains which are potentially amenable to extraction using underground mining methods. At Soledad, Enma and outside of the high-grade domains at Los Cuyes SVM have modelled a lower grade disseminated mineralization which has the potential for extraction using an open pit mining method.

This mineralization interpretation at Los Cuyes is a change from the previous model which only considered a disseminated mineralization style, and did not isolate the high-grade zones separately. For some domains at Los Cuyes (such as the LCW domain) the data strongly support the revised interpretation, with good continuity in the mineralization observed over the project area. While for other domains, the continuity is less clear, and the quantity of data supporting these is less, resulting in lower confidence in these interpretations. The lateral extents of some of the domains are based on wider spaced drilling which naturally carries some additional risk to the confidence in the interpretation of the domain continuity.

At Camp, the previous models relied on interpolated domain definition using indicators, and the current interpretation is supported by a more geologically rigorous interpretation using a combination of the grade and geological logs to link up intersections between drill holes into more coherent and continuous domains.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 xix

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

The geological interpretation at Soledad and Enma is not as well developed as that of Los Cuyes and Camp, relying on grade shells to constrain the mineralization. At Soledad, there is sufficient dense sampling in several locations to confirm the continuity of the mineralization despite the lower understanding of the mineralization controls, and SRK considers this sufficient to support an Indicated Mineral Resource classification.

For all the deposits, the metallurgical test work indicated that there are reasonable prospects for achieving the recoveries applied to the economic assessment. However, further work is required to be able to confirm the optimal processing configuration for each style of mineralization. As such, there is a risk that these recovery factors may change with additional test work and depending on the ultimate processing flow sheet that is selected if the project is developed.

**Recommendations**

In order to confirm the interpretation of the high-grade domains at Camp and Los Cuyes, SRK recommends that a phased exploration program should be undertaken. SVM has planned an initial two-phase exploration program of surface drilling. The initial phase plans for drilling six holes at Los Cuyes with an average length of approximately 400 m for a total of 2,470 m, and a second phase plans for drilling four holes split between Los Cuyes and Camp totalling 1,030 m.

Pending the approval of an environmental permit which is in progress at present, SVM plans to develop underground access drives to intersect the mineralization, and to provide platforms for drilling which will allow for better targeted drilling of shorter holes from the underground development. SVM has not yet developed a detailed development and drilling plant, as this is contingent on the outcomes of the initial surface drilling results and the approval of the environmental permit applications.

SRK recommends that the two mineral processes of "bulk flotation – bulk concentrate cyanidation - cyaniding residue separation flotation " and "cyanidation - cyaniding residue flotation" should be tested in detail, and the trade-off study between the two processes should be conducted according to the final test results.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 xx

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

1 Introduction and Terms of Reference

The Condor Project is located in the Province of Zamora-Chinchipe, near the Ecuador-Peru border and the southern end of the Cordillera del Condor. Silvercorp took ownership of the Condor Project during 2024 through the acquisition of Adventus Mining Corporation.

As part of the advancement of the project, Silvercorp aims to update the Mineral Resource estimates, with underground mining of the Camp and Los Cuyes deposits being the primary focus, and open pit mining of the Soledad and Enma deposits.

SRK Consulting (China) (SRK CN) was previously engaged in May 2024 by Silvercorp to undertake a due diligence audit of the Adventus Mining Corporation's assets in Ecuador in relation to a possible stock exchange listing. A team of consultants from SRK CN and SRK Consulting (North America) undertook an audit including a site visit to the Condor Project during June 2024.

This technical report summarizes the technical information available on the Condor Project and demonstrates that the Condor Project clearly qualifies as an "Advanced Exploration Property". In the opinion of the QP, this property has merit warranting additional exploration expenditures. An exploration work program is recommended comprising diamond core drilling, open pit and underground development to facilitate exploration drilling, and geological and Mineral Resource modelling.

The sources of information and data contained in the technical report include a review of all relevant information and documents provided by Silvercorp as of December 2024.

This technical report was prepared following the guidelines of the Canadian Securities Administrators' National Instrument 43-101 (NI 43-101) and Form 43-101F1. The Mineral Resource Statement reported herein was prepared in conformity with generally accepted CIM Estimation of Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves Best Practice Guidelines.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**1.1** **Scope of Work** 

The scope of work is focused on an update of the Mineral Resource estimates for the Camp and Cuyes deposits for which there is additional data subsequent to the June 2024 review, but to also include updates on the Soledad and Enma deposits for which there is no additional data, except for a revised geological model generated by Silvercorp. During the site visit in June 2024, it was apparent that the understanding of the geology and the controls on the mineralization has evolved since the previous Mineral Resource estimates were undertaken. SRK and Silvercorp agreed that the estimates for these deposits needed to be updated to reflect this understanding.

The detailed items for which the consultants from SRK are responsible include:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Update the drilling, QAQC review and reporting for the additional
data generated subsequent to the 2024 review.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Update the Los Cuyes Mineral Resource model, using the updated
Silvercorp geological model, to include the latest drilling and the high-grade target of Los Cuyes.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 1

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Review and update the Camp, Soledad and Enma Mineral Resource
models using geological models generated by Silvercorp.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Establish a potential underground Mineral Resource at Los Cuyes
using the same parameters as Camp. Update the reporting constraints for the Enma and Soledad deposits using agreed commodity price estimates
and mining costs.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Determine with Silvercorp the preferred mining approach for
the declaration of Mineral Resources on each deposit.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Deliver an independent Technical Report (the Technical Report)
with an updated Mineral Resource estimate prepared in accordance with National instrument 43-101 - Standards of Disclosure for Mineral
Projects (NI 43-101) for filing with applicable securities commissions with sign off by the SRK team as Qualified Persons.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**1.2**  **Work Program** 

The Mineral Resource statement reported herein is a collaborative effort between Silvercorp and SRK personnel. The exploration database was compiled and maintained by Silvercorp and was audited by SRK. The geological model and outlines for the gold mineralization were constructed by Silvercorp and reviewed and in the case of Enma, modified by SRK. In the opinion of SRK, the geological model is a reasonable representation of the distribution of the targeted mineralization at the current level of sampling. The geostatistical analysis, variography, and grade models were completed by SRK during the months of January 2025 to March 2025.

The Mineral Resource Statement reported herein was prepared in conformity with the generally accepted CIM Exploration Best Practices Guidelines and CIM Estimation of Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserves Best Practices Guidelines. This technical report was prepared following the guidelines of the Canadian Securities Administrators' NI 43-101 and Form 43-101 F1.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**1.3** **Basis of Technical Report** 

This report is based on information collected by SRK consultants during a site visit in June 2024, and on additional information provided by Silvercorp throughout the course of SRK's investigations. SRK has no reason to doubt the reliability of the information provided by Silvercorp. This technical report is based on the following sources of information:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Discussions with Silvercorp personnel.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Inspection of the Condor project area, including outcrop and
drill core.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Review
 of exploration data collected by Silvercorp.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 2

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**1.4** **Qualifications of SRK and SRK Team** 

The SRK Group comprises more than 1,700 professionals, offering expertise in a wide range of resource engineering disciplines. The independence of the SRK Group is ensured by the fact that it holds no equity in any project it investigates and that its ownership rests solely with its staff. These facts permit SRK to provide its clients with conflict-free and objective recommendations. SRK has a proven track record in undertaking independent assessments of Mineral Resources and mineral reserves, project evaluations and audits, technical reports and independent feasibility evaluations to bankable standards on behalf of exploration and mining companies, and financial institutions worldwide. Through its work with a large number of major international mining companies, the SRK Group has established a reputation for providing valuable consultancy services to the global mining industry.

To complete the scope of work detailed above, SRK appointed a team of professionals sourced from the SRK Toronto and SRK China offices under the supervision of Mr. Mark Wanless, Pr.Sci.Nat, a Principal Consultant based out of the SRK Toronto office. Ms. Bonnie Zhao is responsible for the data review, QAQC validation and descriptive sections of the technical report. Mr. Falong Hu is responsible for the mining related activities and for the calculation of the required reporting constraints such as open pit shells, and cut-off grades. Mr. Wanless takes the role as the Qualified Person for the reporting on Mineral Resources with support from Mrs. Zhao.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1.5 Site Visit

In accordance with NI 43-101 guidelines, Mr. Wanless, Ms. Zhao, and Mr. Hu travelled to the Condor Project in June 2024 to undertake an inspection of the project, the drill core available at the Camp site for these projects, and to review the exploration procedures, data capture and geological interpretation with the Silvercorp exploration team.

The SRK team was given full access to relevant data and conducted interviews with exploration staff to obtain the information required for technical reporting.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1.6 Acknowledgement

SRK would like to acknowledge the support and collaboration provided by Silvercorp personnel for this assignment. Their collaboration was greatly appreciated and instrumental to the success of this project.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1.7 Declaration

SRK's opinion contained herein and effective **<u>28 February 2025</u>** is based on information collected by SRK throughout the course of SRK's investigations. The information in turn reflects various technical and economic conditions at the time of writing this report. Given the nature of the mining business, these conditions can change significantly over relatively short periods of time. Consequently, actual results may be significantly more or less favourable.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 3

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

This report may include technical information that requires subsequent calculations to derive subtotals, totals, and weighted averages. Such calculations inherently involve a degree of rounding and consequently introduce a margin of error. Where these occur, SRK does not consider them to be material.

SRK is not an insider, associate or an affiliate of Silvercorp, and neither SRK nor any affiliate has acted as advisor to Silvercorp, its subsidiaries or its affiliates in connection with this project. The results of the technical review by SRK are not dependent on any prior agreements concerning the conclusions to be reached, nor are there any undisclosed understandings concerning any future business dealings.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 4

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **2** | **Reliance on Other Experts** |

---

SRK has not performed an independent verification of land title and tenure information as summarized in Section 3 of this report. SRK did not verify the legality of any underlying agreement(s) that may exist concerning the permits or other agreement(s) between third parties, but have relied on Flor, Bustamante, Pizarro, Hurtado Abogados, as expressed in a legal opinion provided to SVM on 26 August 2024. A copy of the title opinions is provided in Appendix A. The reliance applies solely to the legal status of the rights disclosed in Section 3.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 5

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

3 Property Description and Location

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;3.1 Property Location

The Condor Project is located in the Province of Zamora-Chinchipe, near the Ecuador-Peru border and the southern end of the Cordillera del Condor (Figure 3.1). The Project is approximately 400 km south- southeast of Quito, 149 km east of the city of Loja, and 76 km east of the town of Zamora. The approximate centre of the Project properties is located at 95523500 m North and 768000 m East (geographic projection: Provisional South American Datum 1956, UTM Zone 17M).

**Figure 3.1: Location of the Condor Project**

![](ex99-1_024.jpg)

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 6

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;3.2 Mineral Tenure

The Condor Project consists of nine concessions in alphabetical order: Chinapintza, Escondida, FADGOY, FJTX, Hitobo, Santa Barbara, Viche Congüime I, Viche Congüime II, Viche Congüime III (Figure 3.2).

**Figure 3.2: Condor Concessions**

![](ex99-1_025.jpg)

The mining concessions are held under Condormining S.A, Corporación FJTX S.A, and Bestminers S.A., subsidiaries of Adventus Mining Corporation which was acquired by SVM in 2024. Adventus Mining Corporation owns 100% of Ecuador Gold Holdings Ltd., which owns 98.73% of Condormining S.A through its 100% owned subsidiary EMH S.A.. Corporación FJTX is owned by Adventus Mining Corporation through EMH S.A., which holds 99.974% of the common shares of Corporación FJTX. Bestminers S.A. is 98.73% owned by Adventus Mining Corporation through EMH S.A.

Condormining S.A. holds four mining concessions that are part of the Condor Project, namely:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Viche Congüime Cuerpo 1 (registered May 20, 2010, valid
for ~21 years).

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Viche Congüime Cuerpo 2 (registered May 21, 2010, renewed
in 2021 for 25 years).

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 7

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**■** Viche Congüime Cuerpo 3 (registered May 20, 2010, valid
for ~22 years).

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**■** Hitobo (registered May 25, 2010, valid for ~21 years).

Corporación FJTX S.A. holds four mining concessions also included in the Condor Project, namely:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**■** Escondida
(registered February 17, 2017, valid for 25 years).

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**■** Santa Elena (registered February 17, 2017, valid for 25 years).

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**■** FJTX (registered May 25, 2010, valid for ~21 years).

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**■** Fadgoy (registered May 20, 2010, valid for ~21 years) Silvercorp
Legal Opinion.

Bestminers S.A. holds the Chinapintza concession, which was created from a division of Viche Congüime Cuerpo I in 2014. The concession is valid for ~17 years (since February 6, 2014).

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;3.3 Underlying Agreements

Condormining previously held a joint venture agreement with Minera Guangsho Ecuador and JV Chinapintza Mining S.A. (signed November 2, 2012). This agreement was terminated on April 29, 2016, but Condormining still owns 30% of JV Chinapintza Mining S.A., which is undergoing liquidation.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;3.4 Environmental Regulations and Permitting

Currently, the Condor Mining Project holds an active Environmental License for advanced exploration activities, formalized by the Ministry of the Environment, Water, and Ecological Transition (MAATE) through Resolution No. 267 dated April 22, 2013.

However, the Ministry of Energy and Mines (MEM), through an official administrative resolution, has categorized the mining concessions of the Cóndor project under the small-scale mining regime. This categorization provides full legal support for initiating processes related to regularization, monitoring, mining control, and environmental management based on the established mining rights.

The Mineral Resources in the Condor North area are located within the three northernmost contiguous concessions shown in Figure 3.2. According to MEM and MAATE, advanced exploration works have been conducted in these concessions since 2013 in compliance with an approved EIS (Ambienconsul, 2006), biennial environmental audits, and regularly updated PMAs.

From February 19, 2025, the environmental regularization process for a new EIS under the small-scale mining regime was initiated via the Single Environmental Information System (SUIA) for the simultaneous phases of exploration, exploitation, and beneficiation of metallic minerals within an operational area inside the concessions.

The Mining Law allows concessionaires to enter pre-negotiation agreements with the Government of Ecuador related to the development of exploitation contracts. Such discussions may commence following a formal request during the Economic Evaluation Period.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 8

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

Before the construction of the mine and the commencement of mineral production, the Condor Project will be subject to the guidelines and directives required by the current Ecuadorian laws and regulations on mining and environment. Considering previous experience with projects of a similar scale in Ecuador, it is estimated that the main permitting actions will take up to 24 months to complete. These actions are summarized in the following: Change of Mining Phase, Environmental Licensing Process, Water Permits, Safety and Health Planning Actions, Electricity-Related Permits, Fuel and Explosives Permits, among others.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;3.5 Mining Rights in Condor Project

In Ecuador, mining concessions are granted by the Ministry of Energy and Mines (MEM) through a Mining Title. Condormining is the lawful title holder of four mining concessions. The Condormining and Corporación FJTX S.A. FJTX and Fadgoy concessions were originally granted in 2001. In 2009, the Mining Law was reformed and it provided that existing mining titles shall be substituted with new mining titles in accordance with the new provisions of the Mining Law. Therefore, in 2010, new/substituted mining titles were granted to Condormining and Corporación FJTX S.A. for these six concessions. The concession information is summarized in Table 3.1 to Table 3.3.

**Table 3.1: Condormining Concessions**

---

| | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Concession Name** | **Cadastral** <br> **Code** | **Surface Area<br> (hectares)** | **Registration<br> date<sup>1</sup>** | **Term of the concession<sup>2</sup>** |
| Viche Congüime Cuerpo 1 | 2024 | 1930 | May 20, 2010 | 21 years, 3 months, 11 days |
| Viche Congüime Cuerpo 2 | 2024A | 2410 | May 21, 2010 | 25 years counted since February 4, 2021 because it was renewed for additional 25 years |
| Viche Congüime Cuerpo 3 | 500802 | 2501 | May 20, 2010 | 22 years, 11 months, 5 days |
| Hitobo | 500115 | 5850 | May 25, 2010 | 21 years, 4 months, 17 days |

---

Sources: SVM provided Independent Legal Opinion – Flor, Bustamante, Pizarro, Hurtado <br> <sup>1</sup> Date the Mining Title was registered in the Mining Register

<sup>2</sup> Term of the concession (counted since the date of registration in the Mining Registry)

**Table 3.2: Corporación FJTX S.A. Concessions**

---

| | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Concession Name** | **Cadastral**<br> **Code** | **Surface Area<br> (hectares)** | **Registration<br> date<sup>1</sup>** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Term of the concession<sup>2</sup>** |
| Escondida | 50000497 | 1000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;17/02/2017 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;25 years |
| Santa Elena | 50000655 | 615 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;17/02/2017 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;25 years |
| FJTX | 500135 | 960 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;25/05/2010 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;21 years, 4 months, 17 days |
| Fadgoy | 500245 | 199 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;20/05/2010 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;21 years, 3 months, 25 days |

---

Sources: SVM provided Independent Legal Opinion – Flor, Bustamante, Pizarro, Hurtado

<sup>1</sup> Date the Mining Title was registered in the Mining Register

<sup>2</sup> Term of the concession (counted since the date of registration in the Mining Registry)

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 9

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Table 3.3: Bestminers S.A. Concessions**

---

| | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Concession Name** | **Cadastral** **<br> Code** | **Surface Area<br> (hectares)** | **Registration<br> date<sup>1</sup>** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Term of the concession<sup>2</sup>** |
| Chinapintza | 2024.1 | 210.02 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;6/02/2014 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;17 years, 7 months, 2 days |

---

Sources: SVM provided Independent Legal Opinion – Chinapintza

<sup>1</sup> Date the Mining Title was registered in the Mining Register

<sup>2</sup> Term of the concession (counted since the date of registration in the Mining Registry)

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 10

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **4** | **Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure, and Physiography** |

---

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;4.1 Accessibility

The Condor Project is located along the Ecuador-Peru border in southeast Ecuador, approximately 149 km southeast of the City of Loja and 76 km east of the town of Zamora in the province of Zamora- Chinchipe (Figure 4.1). Access is provided by paved and gravel roads.

**Figure 4.1: Access to Condor Project**

![](ex99-1_013.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;4.2 Climate

The climate in the Project area is highland tropical, with an average daily temperature ranging from 21°C to 24°C, and an average annual rainfall of approximately 2,000 mm to 3,000 mm. There is a distinct annual rainy season that typically occurs between January and June. A meteorological station has been fully operational at Condor Camp (at 1,456 masl) since January 2021. Relevant historical rainfall data are also available from the National Institute of Meteorology and Hydrology (Instituto Nacional de Meteorología en Hidrología (INAMHI)) stations in Yantzaza and El Pangui; however, neither station is currently operational.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 11

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;4.3 Local Resources and Infrastructure

The city of Loja (population ~181,000) is the largest regional centre in the area of the Project and will be a major source of basic goods and services for advanced phases of exploration as well as mine construction and operation. Loja is served by regular daily flights with Quito via Ciudad de Catamayo Airport, located 20 km to the west. Skilled labour can be retained in Loja and Zamora and towns closer to the Project; unskilled labour is typically sourced in the smaller villages nearest to the Project.

The Project is connected to Loja, Zamora (population ~14,000) and other regional centres via the national highway network).

Initial estimates indicate that the national electric grid is capable of providing all necessary power to the Project.

Current infrastructure at the Condor Project consists of a fully equipped 70-man exploration camp, located at 1,456 masl directly above the Camp deposit. The camp consists of dormitories, canteen, medical clinic, administrative offices, warehouse, emergency generator, water treatment plant, septic system, diesel storage tanks and fuelling station, a meteorological station, various security installations, and a large core logging and storage facility. Ancillary core storage, warehousing, and waste segregation/accumulation facilities are also located near the camp. The camp is connected to the national grid and has full internet and cellular telephone access.

The Congüime River and numerous smaller streams and springs within the Project concessions can serve as sources of water for all anticipated mining, mineral processing, potable usage, and other Project requirements.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;4.4 Physiography

The Condor Project is located in steep, high-relief terrain, near the southern end of the Cordillera del Condor. Elevations range between 960 m and 1,830 m above sea level. The Project drains into the Congüime River, which flows to the Nangaritza River, a main tributary of the Zamora River.

The Condor Project area is surrounded by secondary tropical forest (Figure 4.2), which has been heavily impacted by illegal mining and other intrusive anthropic activities for at least the last 30-40 years. The Condor Project area is subject to frequent landslides and mudflows, due to the steepness of terrain, underlying geology, periodically extreme precipitation events, and the accumulated exacerbating impacts of illegal mining clearances.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 12

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Figure 4.2: Typical Landscape in the Condor Project**

![](ex99-1_014.jpg)

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 13

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **5** | **History** |

---

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.1 Ownership History

The ownership history of the Condor Project commenced with artisanal and small-scale miners operating in the area since pre-1988. In 1988, modern exploration commenced through a joint venture between ISSFA and Prominex UK. This partnership lasted until 1991 when Prominex UK withdrew, and in 1993, TVX Gold, Inc. (TVX) and Chalupas Mining joined the venture. They remained involved until 2000, after which Goldmarca (formerly Hydromet Technologies Ltd.) formed a new joint venture with ISSFA in 2002.

Goldmarca rebranded to Ecometals Ltd. in 2007 and continued operations until the Ecuadorian government imposed a moratorium on mineral exploration from April 2008 to November 2009. In 2010, Ecometals sold its interest to Ecuador Capital, which was later renamed Ecuador Gold and Copper Corp. (EGX). Lumina Gold Corp (Lumina) acquired EGX in 2016, and in 2018, Lumina spun out Luminex Resources Corp. (Luminex), making the Condor Project 90% owned by Condormining, a Luminex subsidiary, with ISSFA retaining a 10% stake. ISSFA has however not contributed any funding to the continuing operation of the project, and consequently its share has been diluted to 1.3% to date. In January 2024, Adventus Mining Corporation (Adventus) merged with Luminex.

In July 2024, Silvercorp acquired Adventus and assumed the ownership of the Condor Project.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.2 Exploration History

The exploration of the Condor Project area has been extensive and spans several decades.

From 1988 to 1991, ISSFA and Prominex UK conducted regional stream sediment sampling and geological mapping. When TVX Gold, Inc. and Chalupas Mining joined in 1993, they expanded the exploration program to include soil, rock, and stream sampling, trenching, geophysical surveys, and drilling 195 holes totalling 42,101.5 m. They also completed 1,081 m of underground development at the Chinapintza veins.

After TVX and Chalupas withdrew in 2000, Goldmarca / Ecometals took over and continued with reconnaissance mapping, IP and magnetic surveys, and drilling 154 holes totalling 33,322.9 ms from 2002 to 2008.

Exploration was stopped due to a moratorium imposed from April 2008 to November 2009. Resuming in 2012, EGX focused on geological mapping, rock sampling, and diamond drilling 37 holes totalling 22,051.7 m until 2016.

Under Lumina Gold Corp from 2016 to 2018, the project saw additional mapping, sampling, and geophysical surveys, leading to the drilling of nine holes totalling 1,907.4 m.

Since 2018, Luminex Resources Corp. has continued these efforts, conducting a property-wide airborne ZTEM geophysical survey and drilling 28 holes totalling 14,801 m at the Camp deposit.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 14

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

Since the early 1980s, extensive geochemical work (Table 5.1) has been conducted at the Condor Project, Stream, soil, and rock surveys have been carried out, identifying well-defined gold-copper soil anomalies at Santa Barbara and a copper-molybdenum soil anomaly at El Hito. Other areas also show anomalous gold and copper values.

As of 2018, previous operators completed 703 trenches totalling 14,650 m, mainly around the Condor breccia pipes.

From 2017 to 2018, Soil surveys were conducted at Santa Barbara, Prometedor, Camp, Wanwintza Bajo, and Wanwintza Alto by Luminex. Detailed results are available in the 2018 Technical Report.

In 2019, Luminex conducted two soil sampling grids in the Camp area, collecting 110 samples.

Since 2018, Luminex has continued property-wide sampling activities, advancing Prometedor and Nayumbi to drill-ready stages.

**Table 5.1: Geochemical Surveys of Condor Project**

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| **Time Period** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Activity** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Details** |
| 1980s-Present | &nbsp;&nbsp;Geochemical Surveys | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Stream, soil, and rock surveys; gold-copper soil |
|  |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;anomalies at Santa Barbara; copper-molybdenum soil anomaly at El Hito |
| Pre-2017 | &nbsp;&nbsp;Trenching and Channel Sampling | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;703 trenches totaling 14,650 m, mainly around the |
|  |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Condor breccia pipes |
| 2017-2018 | &nbsp;&nbsp;Soil Surveys by Luminex | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Conducted at Santa Barbara, Prometedor, Camp, |
|  |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Wanwintza Bajo, and Wanwintza Alto |
| 2019 | &nbsp;&nbsp;Soil Sampling by Luminex | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Two soil sampling grids in the Camp area, totaling 110 samples |
| Since 2018 | &nbsp;&nbsp;Ongoing Sampling by Luminex | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Property-wide sampling activities; Prometedor and |
|  |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Nayumbi brought to drill-ready stage |

---

Sources: SRK, Summary from 2021 Condor Project PEA

Geophysical surveys (Table 5.2) have played a crucial role in identifying targets within the Condor Project, Magnetic Surveys did not yield significant useful data before 2006.

CSAMT Surveys were Conducted by previous owners, these surveys identified areas of low resistivity correlating with the sulphide-rich Chinapintza veins before 2006.

In 2006, A Pole-Dipole IP Survey with 100 m spacing on northwest-trending lines covered the Condor breccias. High-chargeability values reflecting sulphide mineralization were found only at the Enma breccia deposit. High-chargeability zones near other breccia zones remain untested.

In 2019, A helicopter-supported ZTEM survey by Geotech Ltd. covered 780-line kilometres in the Condor North area. This survey revealed several conductive zones correlating with precious-metal showings, including Prometedor and the Soledad Baja target, aligning with the Camp discovery.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 15

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Table 5.2: Geophysical Surveys of Condor Project**

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| **Time Period** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Survey Type** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Details** |
| pre-2006 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Magnetic Surveys | &nbsp;&nbsp;Did not yield significant useful data |
| pre-2006 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;CSAMT Surveys | &nbsp;&nbsp;Identified areas of low resistivity correlating with sulphide-rich Chinapintza veins |
| 2006 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Pole-Dipole IP Survey | &nbsp;&nbsp;Covered the Condor breccias; high-chargeability values at Enma breccia deposit |
| 2019 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;ZTEM Survey | &nbsp;&nbsp;Helicopter-supported; covered 780-line km in the Condor North area; revealed several conductive zones correlating with precious-metal showings |

---

Sources: SRK, Summary from 2021 Condor Project PEA

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.3 Production

Despite extensive exploration efforts, the Condor Project has not yet achieved commercial mineral production. However, artisanal mining has been a significant activity in the area since the 1980s. Legal and illegal artisanal miners have been extracting gold from the Chinapintza veins, and this activity continues to the present day. Unfortunately, there are no official production records available for this artisanal mining, highlighting the need for more formal and regulated mining operations to fully realize the project's potential.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.4 Previous Mineral Resource Estimates

The Condor Project has seen several updates to its Mineral Resource estimates over the years, reflecting the evolving understanding of the area's geology and mineral potential:

From 1993 to 2000, TVX Gold, Inc. and Chalupas Mining conducted extensive exploration, including drilling 195 holes totaling 42,101.5 m. This period's exploration provided initial insights into the mineralization but did not culminate in a formal resource estimate.

Between 2002 and 2008, Goldmarca/Ecometals continued drilling, completing 154 holes totaling 33,322.9 m across various gold deposits. Their work helped delineate significant mineralized zones, although specific resource estimates from this period are not detailed in the provided history.

Ecuador Gold and Copper Corp. (EGX) conducted diamond drilling from 2012 to 2016, completing 37 holes totaling 22,051.7 m at several deposits. Their efforts contributed to a better understanding of the mineralization, leading to more refined resource estimates.

In 2015, A Preliminary Economic Assessment (PEA) was completed for the Santa Barbara Project (Short et al., 2015). This PEA included updated Mineral Resource estimates, providing a more comprehensive understanding of the project's economic potential.

Lumina Gold Corp released an updated Mineral Resource estimate in May 2018, covering four deposits: Santa Barbara, Los Cuyes, Soledad, and Enma. This estimate was further detailed in a technical report released on July 10, 2018. This update significantly advanced the project's resource understanding and laid the groundwork for further exploration and development by Lumina and later Luminex.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 16

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

The mineral resources for Santa Barbara, Los Cuyes, Soledad, Enma deposits were restated in a subsequent PEA Technical Report released on July 28, 2021, using updated metal prices and other parameters. Additionally, an underground Mineral Resources estimate for Camp was also released in the PEA.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 17

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **6** | **Geological Setting and Mineralization** |

---

 

*The contents of this section are mainly sourced from the Condor Project, Ecuador NI 43-101 Technical Report, Condor Project NI 43-101 Technical Report on Preliminary Economic Assessment Report in 2021 (Elfin et al, (2021)).*

The Condor Project is located in the Cordillera del Condor in the Zamora copper-gold metallogenic belt. The Project area comprises epithermal gold-silver, porphyry copper-gold ±molybdenum, skarn gold-copper, and numerous alluvial gold deposits (Morrison, 2007; Williams, 2008).

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**6.1** **Regional Geology** 

The Condor Project is located in the Cordillera del Condor in the Zamora copper-gold metallogenic belt. The Project area comprises epithermal gold-silver, porphyry copper-gold ±molybdenum, and numerous alluvial gold deposits (Morrison, 2007; Williams, 2008). The Fruta del Norte and Mirador Mines, and the San Carlos-Panantza and Warintza deposits are also located within the Zamora copper-gold metallogenic belt (Drobe et al., 2013).

The geologic make-up of the Cordillera del Condor is dominated by the Middle to Late Jurassic Zamora batholith, dated between 153–169 Ma (Litherland et al., 1992; Drobe et al., 2013). Calc-alkaline, I-type batholith lithologies form components of a continent-scale remnant magmatic arc emplaced along an Andean-type continental margin. Batholith magmas intrude supra-crustal sequences of Palaeozoic to Mesozoic sedimentary and arc-related igneous and volcanic rocks. The Zamora batholith is exposed along a 200 km north-northeast trend, is over 100 km wide, and is dissected by predominantly north- south faults forming part of a laterally extensive fold and thrust belt.

The regional geology and key mineral deposits are shown in Figure 6.1.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 18

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Figure 6.1: Regional Geological Map of Condor Project**

![](ex99-1_015.jpg)

Source: Modified from 2021 Condor Project PEA

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 19

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

Batholith magmas are typically composed of equigranular, medium-grained monzonites and granodiorites along with younger sub-volcanic porphyritic (plagioclase-hornblende ±quartz) intrusions, the latter spanning rare gabbroic to more commonplace andesitic to rhyolitic compositions. Porphyritic intrusions form every 15 km to 20 km along the north-northeast axis of the Zamora batholith and are commonly associated with copper and gold mineralization.

The Zamora batholith intrudes Late Triassic to Early Jurassic Santiago Formation sedimentary and volcanic rocks, locally incorporating them as faulted blocks or roof pendants. Late Jurassic Chapiza Formation sedimentary rocks and Misahuallí volcanic rocks unconformably overlie the batholith. Early Cretaceous quartz arenites of the Hollín Formation as well as sandstones, mudstones and limestones of the Napo Formation further cover portions of the eroded Jurassic volcano-sedimentary sequence and the batholith (Hedenquist, 2007; Drobe et al., 2013). This sequence is locally overlain by rhyolitic to dacitic volcanoclastic rocks of the Early Cretaceous Chinapintza Formation. Late Cretaceous felsic to intermediate stocks and dykes are aligned with regional fault structures.

North-south-trending detachment faults form the principal structural grain, precursors of which controlled the emplacement of the batholith and its subsequent uplift. A series of younger northeast-, northwest- and east-northeast-striking cross structures control the emplacement of younger intrusions.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**6.2** **Property Geology** 

The Condor Project encompasses a diverse and geologically complex area with at least three distinctive mineral sub-districts, each characterized by unique mineralization styles and deposits. Only the Condor North area is discussed in this report. The sub-districts highlight the geological diversity and significant exploration potential within the Condor Project, underscoring the presence of various mineral deposits and targets across the concession. A concession-scale geology map of the Condor Project is shown in Figure 6.2.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 20

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Figure 6.2: Property Geology Map of Condor Project**

![](ex99-1_016.jpg)

Source: Modified from 2021 Condor Project PEA

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 21

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Condor North Area:**

The Condor Project's geology is both diverse and complex, particularly in the Condor North area. This region is characterized by distinctive low- to intermediate-sulphidation epithermal vein swarms located in the northern part. These vein swarms form a series of north-northwest-striking, narrow, high-grade gold and electrum-bearing manganoan carbonate veins, often accompanied by base metals and hosted in dacite porphyry.

Notably, the Chinapintza vein district extends along strike for 1.5 km over a zone 0.6 km wide, traversing the former Jerusalem concession and continuing into Peru. In the 1990s, TVX conducted more than 45,000 m of drilling followed by underground trial mine development to explore these veins. Although sufficient data for an accurate Mineral Resource evaluation is lacking, artisanal mining continues to exploit these veins.

Immediately south of the Chinapintza vein district lies the Condor breccia, dyke, and dome complex. This complex is hosted by Early Cretaceous rhyodacite to dacite intrusions and volcaniclastics of the Chinapintza Formation, encircled by the Zamora Batholith. Within this area, several diatreme breccias, dykes, plugs, and sub-volcanic domes are associated with these intrusions. Rhyolite dykes, in particular, play a crucial role in localizing vein mineralization. The Condor breccia, dyke, and dome complex is further divided into four main zones: Los Cuyes, Soledad, Enma, and Camp (Figure 6.3). Gold-silver mineralization in these zones is linked with sphalerite-pyrite/marcasite veins, which typically occur within breccias, along the contacts of rhyolite dykes, and as replacements and disseminations.

These veins are often disrupted by post-mineral extensional faults.

**Figure 6.3: Diagrammatic Cross-section of Los Cuyes, Soledad, and Camp**

![](ex99-1_017.jpg)

Source: Hathaway (undated)

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 22

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**6.3** **Mineralization** 

The Condor breccia, dyke and dome complex hosts the Camp, Los Cuyes, Soledad, Enma and the Chinapintza vein deposits and the un-drilled Prometedor prospect (Figure 6.4, Prometedor lies southeast of the area shown in the figure).

**Camp**

The Camp deposit features gold and silver mineralization linked to a swarm of northwest-striking rhyolite-dacite dykes, likely originating from a larger buried rhyolite intrusion. These dykes are concentrated at the contact between a volcanic/intrusive complex and a major granodiorite intrusion. The mineralized zone, dipping steeply at 85° to the northeast, extends over 500 m along strike and is 80 to 130 m wide.

Gold occurs within veins containing pyrite, marcasite, iron-rich sphalerite (marmatite), galena, ± chalcopyrite, pyrrhotite, quartz, and rhodochrosite gangue. Host rocks include altered granodiorites, breccias, flow-banded rhyolite, and phreatomagmatic breccia. The area is capped by 30 to 80 m of trachyte to rhyolitic welded tuff, with the Camp ridge bounded by the Camp Fault and Piedras Blancas Fault.

Anomalous surface copper mineralization and stockwork porphyry clasts with molybdenite in the nearby Los Cuyes diatreme suggest a deeper common mineralized porphyry underlying the Condor breccia, dyke, and dome complex.

**Los Cuyes**

Los Cuyes is hosted within an oval-shaped diatreme measuring 450 m northeast-southwest, 300 m northwest-southeast, and extending to at least 350 m in depth. This diatreme, resembling an inverted cone plunging approximately 50° to the southeast, consists of an outer shell of polymictic phreatomagmatic breccia and an internal fill of well-sorted rhyolitic lapilli tuffs, breccias, and volcanic sandstones. Amphibolite and quartz arenite fragments occur around its periphery, with dacite and rhyolite ring dykes intruding the steep margins.

Alteration within the diatreme is primarily sericite-illite, with localized carbonate and intense phyllic alteration at the margins, indicating focused hydrothermal fluid flow. Gold and silver mineralization occurs in veins containing pyrite, sphalerite, galena, chalcopyrite, and pyrrhotite. The entire diatreme exhibits a low background level of gold, primarily in disseminated pyrite and sphalerite. The highest gold values are found in veins of massive sphalerite, pyrite, and marcasite, with minor quartz, galena, and rhodochrosite, similar to the nearby Chinapintza veins.

Lithological contacts, such as dykes cutting through the diatreme and its outer breccia shell, favoured vein development. The mineralization and alteration at Los Cuyes post-date all local rock types, including blocks of the Hollín Formation, indicating that the mineralization is post-Early Cretaceous.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 23

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Soledad**

The Soledad Zone features a 700-meter diameter oval-shaped rhyolite intrusion within the Zamora Batholith, surrounded by discontinuous pyritic breccias. It includes individual mineralized zones named Soledad, San Jose, Bonanza, and Guayas. Epithermal gold-silver mineralization at Soledad resembles that of the Camp deposit, with patchy matrix replacement by sulphides, grain-scale replacement of rhyolite feldspars by sphalerite and pyrite, and irregular sphalerite veinlets. Unique to Soledad are the pyritic hydrothermal matrix breccias at the upper margins of the intrusion at San Jose and Guayas.

The overall mineralization at Soledad is described as a north-south elongated wine glass-shaped body, tapering between 200 to 300 m below the surface and extending approximately 110 m northwest by 50 m northeast. Sphalerite transitions to pyrite as the dominant sulfide at around 100 m below the surface, leading to diminished gold and silver grades similar to Los Cuyes.

**Enma**

Gold and silver mineralization at Enma is hosted in a west-northwest-trending rhyolitic breccia that occurs at the contact between andesite lapilli tuffs and the Zamora batholith. The deposit has dimensions of 280 m east-northeast, is approximately 20-75 m wide, and has a vertical extent of 350 m. Alteration mineralogy is primarily chlorite with minor quartz-sericite ± alunite-kaolinite. Gold is associated with pyrite-sphalerite-quartz and locally rhodochrosite veins. At depths greater than 200 m, gold-poor, pyrite-pyrrhotite ± chalcopyrite veins are more dominant.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 24

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Figure 6.4: Condor Volcanogenic Breccia and Dome Complex**

![](ex99-1_018.jpg)

Sources: 2021 Condor Project PEA

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 25

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **7** | **Deposit Types** |

---

In the Condor North area, gold and silver mineralization within the Condor breccia, dyke and dome complex, and the adjacent Chinapintza veins, as well as at the newly identified Nayumbi prospect located in the Condor South area, is consistent with low to intermediate sulphidation epithermal mineralization (Hedenquist et al., 1996). Notable examples of epithermal gold deposits include Fruta del Norte (Ecuador), McLaughlin (California), Hishikari (Japan), Waihi (New Zealand) and parts of Porgera (Papua New Guinea). The Condor Project is reported to display the characteristics of low to intermediate sulphidation epithermal deposits (as described by Sillitoe, 1993; White and Hedenquist, 1995; Leary et al., 2016).

The Camp, Los Cuyes, Soledad, and Enma prospects are consistent with low to intermediate sulphidation epithermal mineralization. Characteristics of such deposits are:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Occur at convergent plate settings, typically in calc-alkaline volcanic arcs.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Form at shallow depths (<2 km) from near-neutral pH, sulphur-poor
hydrothermal fluids, often of meteoric origin, with metals derived from underlying porphyry intrusions.

allows for mineralized fluids to permeate, with gold precipitated by boiling.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Sub-types include sulphide-poor deposits with rhyolites, sulphide-rich
deposits with andesites/rhyodacites, and sulphide-poor deposits with alkali rocks.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Hydrothermal alteration is zoned and subtle, characterized by
sericite, illite, smectite, and carbonate.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Features quartz, quartz-carbonate, and carbonate veins with
various textures.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Sulphide content varies (1-20%), typically <5%, with pyrite,
sphalerite, galena, and low copper (chalcopyrite).

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ High gold, silver, arsenic, antimony, mercury, zinc, lead, selenium,
and low copper, tellurium.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 26

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **8** | **Exploration** |

---

In 2024, Silvercorp took ownership of the Condor Project through the acquisition of Adventus Mining Corporation. As part of the 2024 SVM relogging program (Figure 8.1), the geology team completed the evaluation of 100 DDH, totalling 46,942 m, including 38 DDH from Camp Zone and 62 DDH from Los Cuyes. The program focused on understanding and confirming the project characteristics including lithology types, structural setup, and mineralization style.

**Figure 8.1: 2024 SVM Relogging Program**

![](ex99-1_019.jpg)

Sources: SVM, 2024

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 27

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **9** | **Drilling** |

---

Since 1994, the Condor Project has undergone extensive drilling by various operators. The drilling campaigns of Condor Project from 1994 to 2021, totalling 538 holes with 157,312 m, focused primarily on the Condor North Area and Condor Central Area.

Drilling campaigns from 2022 to Sep 2023, totalled 21,838 m, mainly distributed in Camp Condor, Los Cuyes, 4 holes in El Hito, and 7 holes in Prometedor. Figure 9.1 and Figure 9.2 display the locations of the drillholes in North and Central Area of Condor Project respectively.

**Figure 9.1: Condor North Area Drilling Location Map**

![](ex99-1_020.jpg)

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 28

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Figure 9.2: Condor Central Area Drilling Location Map**

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**9.1** **Historical Drilling (Pre- 2019)** 

Condor Project has experienced extensive drilling by various operators during 1994 to 2018. The drilling programs summary is presented in Table 9.1.

TVX Gold, Inc. initiated drilling between 1994 and 2000, testing the Chinapintza veins (75 holes; 20,489 m), Condor breccias (97 holes; 16,128 m), Santa Barbara (19 holes; 4,296 m), and El Hito (4 holes; 1,188 m). It used worker-portable drills that produced HQ- or NQ-size core. Downhole surveys were completed, but the specific method is unknown, except at Santa Barbara where a Pajari instrument was used. Most of the collars are marked with a concrete pad.

From 2004 to 2007, Goldmarca drilled the Condor breccia pipes (124 holes; 21,612 m), followed by Ecometals in 2008, focusing on the Condor breccias (29 holes; 11,111 m) and Santa Barbara (1 hole; 600 m). All holes were drilled using HQ-size core, reducing to NQ as needed. Holes were located using a handheld Garmin GPS instrument. Downhole surveys were completed for 33 of the drill holes using a FLEXIT instrument which takes readings at 3 m or 6 m intervals. Core recoveries for holes drilled by Goldmarca and Ecometals were generally >90% (Hughes, 2008).

Between 2012 and 2014, Ecuador Gold and Copper Corp. (EGX) conducted further drilling on the Chinapintza veins (1 hole; 757 m), Los Cuyes and Soledad breccias (4 holes; 2,574 m), Santa Barbara (27 holes; 15,223 m), and El Hito (5 holes; 3,498 m). Two contractors were used for this drilling: Roman Drilling Corp. S.A. and Hubbard Perforaciones Cia., Ltda. (Hubbard); both are based in Cuenca, Ecuador. All holes were drilled using HTW-size (HQ) core, reducing to NTW (NQ) as needed. The Hubbard drills were worker-portable and similar to Hydracore 4000 rigs. Holes were located using

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 29

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

a handheld Garmin GPS. When a hole was completed, the hole location was marked with a cement monument displaying the hole number, azimuth and dip. A Reflex EZ-SHOT™ was used to provide downhole orientation data at 50 m intervals. Core recoveries during this period of drilling average approximately 93%.

From 2017 to 2018, Lumina used Hubbard Perforación Cia. Ltda.to complete nine HTW (HQ) drill holes (1,907 m) in the Santa Barbara area. Three targets peripheral to the main Santa Barbara mineralization were tested: Santa Barbara northwest, northeast, and southeast. A Hydracore 2000 drill was used, and the drill was moved using a small tractor. Drill holes were located using a handheld Garmin GPS. A Reflex EZ-SHOT™ was used to provide downhole orientation data at 50 m intervals. Core recoveries in holes drilled by Lumina average just over 91%.

**Table 9.1: Drilling Programs of Condor Project (Pre-2019)**

---

| | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Year** | **Company/Entity** | **Core**<br>**Boreholes** | **Total Metres**<br>**Drilled** | **Focus Area** |
|  |  | 75 | 20489 | Chinapintza veins |
| 1994-2000 | TVX Gold, Inc. | 97 | 16128 | Condor breccias |
|  |  | 19 | 4296 | Santa Barbara |
|  |  | 4 | 1188 | El Hito |
| 2004-2007 | Goldmarca | 124 | 21612 | Condor breccia pipes |
| 2008 | Ecometals | 29 | 11111 | Condor breccias |
|  |  | 1 | 600 | Santa Barbara |
|  |  | 1 | 757 | Chinapintza veins |
| 2012-2013 | Ecuador Gold and | 4 | 2574 | Los Cuyes and Soledad breccias |
|  | Copper Corp. | 27 | 15223 | Santa Barbara |
|  |  | 5 | 3498 | El Hito |
| 2017-2018 | Lumina Gold Corp | 9 | 1907 | Geochemical and IP anomalies around Santa Barbara |

---

Sources: SRK, Summary from 2021 Condor Project PEA

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**9.2** **Luminex Drilling (2019 – 2021)** 

From 2019 to 2020, Luminex Resources Corp. has completed 46 holes (23,683 m) focusing on geochemical anomalies and delineation drilling at Camp and Soledad deposits, and additional holes to recover metallurgical material from Cuyes and Enma. Drilling was completed by two contractors, Kluane Drilling Ecuador S.A. and Rumi Drilling Services Ecuador (RDSEC) S.A. Each used a Hydra core 2000. All holes were collared with HQ-size (or HTW) core and reduced to NQ (or NTW) when needed. Access trails to drill pads were constructed by hand as well as using a small excavator. Rig movements were facilitated by a Bobcat and, where possible, a larger Morooka all-terrain vehicle was used.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 30

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

All holes were drilled as oriented core via Reflex ACT II or III equipment with downhole surveys completed by either DeviShot TM or Reflex EZ-TRACTM XTF tools. Data from downhole surveys were collected at 30 m to 50 m intervals. Collars were initially spotted via handheld Garmin GPS and later surveyed using a total-station theodolite (Sokkia model 105) to a 5 mm accuracy.

Core recoveries average 98% for drilling conducted by Luminex.

In 2021, Luminex completed one short hole (100 m) for metallurgical samples at the Enma deposit. Drilling was completed by Rumi Drilling and under the same protocols as prevailed during the 2020 program.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**9.3** **Luminex Drilling (2022 – 2023)** 

The QP was provided the drillhole database CN_DH_Export_Database_8Sept2023.xlsx) as of September 8, 2023, totalling 55 holes with 21,838 m. These new holes were not included for Mineral Resource estimates as of December 31, 2021. The drilling hole summary is presented in Table 9.2.

**Table 9.2: Drilling hole Summary of Condor Project (2022-2023)**

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Year** | **Area** | **Core Boreholes** | **Total Metres Drilled** |
|  | Camp Condor | 13 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;4695 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2022 | El Hito | 4 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2418 |
|  | Los Cuyes | 15 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5660 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Sub Total** |  | **32** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**12773** |
|  | Los Cuyes | 16 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7990 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2023 | Prometedor | 7 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1075 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Sub Total** |  | **23** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**9064** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Grand Total** |  | **55** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**21838** |

---

Sources: SRK, Summary from the drillhole database CN_DH_Export_Database_8Sept2023.xlsx

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**9.4** **Luminex Drilling Procedures** 

The exploration drilling procedure involves meticulous planning and execution to ensure accuracy and minimal environmental impact. Initially, diamond drilling using HQ and NQ diameter rods is the primary method, continuously monitored by Exploration Managers or their designees, with reverse-circulation (RC) drilling used occasionally as outlined in Lumina's "Guidelines for Drilling and Trenching Contractors." Drilling contractors are responsible for mobilizing all necessary equipment to the site, controlling water usage and drilling mud, managing borehole progress, transporting core boxes, providing required pipes and consumables, and preventing spills of fuel and lubricants. They must also collect and transport all garbage or waste generated during the drilling process.

Contractors must construct drilling pads at specified borehole locations, taking care to separate and preserve topsoil for later reclamation. Geologists mark the positions in the field and assist drillers with

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 31

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

marking azimuth and dip of the planned hole. Surveyors accurately measure collar locations with elevation using Total Station or GPS equipment with centimetre-scale accuracy. Drillers complete hole deviation surveys during drilling at systematic intervals using down-hole survey equipment.

Post-drilling, contractors are responsible for reclaiming drill pads by re-grading them to original contours to blend with the surrounding ground surface. The disturbed sites are covered with reserved topsoil and revegetated with native species. Drilling mud pits are backfilled, covered with reserved topsoil, and revegetated; all geosynthetic pit liner material and any other debris from drilling operations must be properly disposed of. Any residual water in the mud pits is tested for pH and adjusted with lime to pH 5-7 before release into the environment.

Drill collars are reclaimed by pouring an approximately 0.5 m² concrete monument around the casing. The monument is inscribed with the hole number and date of the borehole. The casing stub is cut off about 0.5 m to 0.75 m above the monument surface, fitted with a PVC slip cap, and marked with reflective tape. These detailed procedures ensure precise data collection and uphold environmental stewardship throughout the exploration process.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**9.5** **Recommendations** 

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ In
the authors' opinion, the current core handling, logging, sampling and core storage protocols on the Condor Project are consistent
with common industry standards, and the authors are not aware of any drilling, sampling or recovery factors that could materially
impact the accuracy and reliability of these results.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ All
database records should be assigned a consistent year and area.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ The
authors of this report recommend that Silvercorp take additional bulk density measurements on samples for Los Cuyes, Soledad, and Enma
to improve the confidence in the estimation of the bulk density in these deposits.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 32

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **10** | **Sample Preparation, Analyses, and Security** |

---

Condor resource drilling sampling from 1994 to 1996 were sent to Bondar Clegg (now ALS Chemex) or SGS in Ecuador for preparation; analysis by SGS laboratories in Canada. In 1999 and 2020, drill samples from Santa Barbara analysed by ALS Chemex. Bondar Clegg and SGS were recognized for their high standards, holding ISO/IEC 17025 and ISO 9000 accreditations respectively.

From 2004 to 2008, The samples of Condor project were sent to ALS Chemex in Quito or Acme's preparation lab in Cuenca. Acme Labs in Vancouver, Canada, conducted the analysis, including fire assay with ICP finish for Au and Ag, and AA for Zn, Cu, and Pb. Acme Labs, known for its reliability, held ISO 9001:2000 accreditation at the time.

Between 2012 and 2014, The samples of Condor project were transported to Acme Lab's preparation facility in Cuenca. Analysis was performed by Acme Lab in Santiago, Chile, using fire assay techniques for gold and ICP-ES for silver and copper. Acme Labs maintained ISO 9001:2000 accreditation during this period.

During Lumina Gold Corp.'s 2017-2018 drilling program of Condor Project, samples were sent to MSALABS in Vancouver, Canada, for analysis. MSALABS conducted gold assays using fire assay techniques and ICP-MS analysis with four-acid digestion. The laboratory-maintained ISO/IEC 17025:2005 accreditation, ensuring high-quality results.

From 2019 to 2021, Luminex Resources Corp. continued with rigorous sampling procedures similar to those of Lumina. Samples were sent to ALS Laboratories in Quito for preparation. Analysis was performed by ALS Laboratories in Lima, Peru, using fire assay and ICP-MS analysis. ALS Laboratories held ISO/IEC 17025:2017 accreditation, providing assurance of the reliability of their results.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**10.1** **Sampling** 

Throughout the Condor Project, rigorous sampling procedures were consistently applied to ensure the integrity and reliability of collected data.

From 1994 to 2000, drill core was cut in half using a diamond saw, with one half sent for analysis and the other half stored securely in core boxes at the project site. TVX Gold Inc. conducted continuous sampling at 1.0-m intervals for the first holes drilled on the Chinapintza veins. Subsequent holes focused on potentially mineralized core with variable lengths. For other areas such as Enma, Los Cuyes, San Jose, and Soledad Breccias, entire holes were sampled with intervals ranging from 1.0 to

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2.5 m.

Between 2004 and 2007, Goldmarca, later known as Ecometals, continued the practice of sampling entire drill holes at 2.0-m intervals. The core was cut in half, with one half placed in marked sample bags and sealed, while the other half was returned to the core box and stored in a warehouse.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 33

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

From 2012 to 2014, Ecuador Gold and Copper Corp. maintained a similar approach, Core was cleaned and photographed in two box sets at the core-logging facility. Core intervals were marked at intervals of 1.0, 2.0, or 2.5 m, and cut in half using a diamond saw. Half of the core was placed in labelled plastic sample bags secured with tamper-proof zip ties, with the remaining half stored securely.

In the period from 2017 to 2018, Lumina Gold Corp. followed suit, sampling core at 2-m intervals and placing half of the core in plastic bags with bar-coded sample tickets, secured with tamper-proof zip ties. The other half was stored on-site. Core was washed, and wet and dry photos were taken of the whole core at the Luminex exploration camp.

Since 2019, Luminex Resources Corp. has continued this rigorous sampling procedure, cutting core at intervals of 1 to 2 m, with half the core placed in plastic bags with bar-coded sample tickets, secured with tamper-proof zip ties, and the remaining half stored on-site at the Luminex exploration camp. Some older core from previous operators is stored near the Soledad deposit. Core was washed and photographed (Figure 10.1) in dry and wet conditions under consistent artificial light at the Luminex exploration camp.

**Figure 10.1: Drill Core Photograph and Logging Areas of Condor Project**

![](ex99-1_022.jpg)

Sources: SRK site visit, 2024

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**10.2** **Sample Preparation and Analysis** 

The preparation and analysis of samples from the Condor Project were managed by various reputable laboratories to ensure high-quality results.

During the period from 1994 to 2000, TVX Gold Inc. sent samples to Bondar Clegg (now ALS Chemex) or SGS in Ecuador for preparation, with analysis conducted by SGS laboratories in Canada using fire assay techniques. From 1999 onwards, ALS Chemex analyzed drill samples from Santa Barbara.

Between 2004 and 2007, Goldmarca and later Ecometals prepared samples at ALS Chemex in Quito or Acme's preparation lab in Cuenca. Analysis was conducted by Acme Labs in Vancouver, using fire assay with ICP finish for gold and silver, and AA for zinc, copper, and lead.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 34

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

From 2012 to 2014, Ecuador Gold and Copper Corp. prepared samples at Acme Lab's facility in Cuenca and sent them to Acme Lab in Santiago, Chile, for analysis. They used fire assay for gold and ICP-ES for silver and copper.

Between 2017 and 2018, Lumina Gold Corp. used MSALABS in Vancouver, Canada, for sample analysis. They conducted gold assays using fire assay techniques on a 30 g charge and 34-element ICP-MS analysis with four-acid digestion.

Since 2019, Luminex Resources Corp. has prepared samples at ALS Laboratories in Quito, with analysis conducted at ALS Laboratories in Lima, Peru. They used a 50 g charge for gold by fire assay and 34-element ICP-MS analysis.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**10.3** **Sample Shipment and Security** 

Drill core is stored in a clean and well-maintained core shack in the Luminex exploration camp. To avoid swelling and caking, the pulp samples are stored in a sealed plastic bag in the refrigerator (Figure 10.2).

Stringent sample shipment and security measures were consistently implemented to maintain the integrity of the samples throughout the project.

From 1994 to 2000, TVX Gold Inc. ensured samples were securely shipped to SGS in Ecuador for preparation and then to Canada for analysis and the other half stored securely. Samples for ALS Chemex were sent directly to their lab.

Between 2004 and 2007, Goldmarca and Ecometals transported samples by truck to Loja and then shipped them to ALS Chemex in Quito or Acme in Cuenca. Any broken sample bags were retaken and reshipped to ensure integrity.

From 2012 to 2014, Ecuador Gold and Copper Corp. used their employees or bonded couriers to transport samples to Acme Lab's preparation facility in Cuenca, ensuring secure handling.

In the period from 2017 to 2018, Lumina Gold Corp. shipped samples to MSALABS preparation lab in Cuenca. Secure tamper-proof tags were checked upon arrival to ensure no irregularities.

Subsequent to 2019, Luminex Resources Corp. had samples collected from their exploration camp by ALS Laboratories representatives and delivered to their preparation lab in Quito. Secure handling and tamper-proof tags ensured the integrity of the samples throughout the process.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 35

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Figure 10.2: Core Tray and Sample Storage of Condor Project**

![](ex99-1_023.jpg)

Sources: SRK Site visit, 2024

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**10.4** **Bulk Density** 

Specific gravity (SG) data are only available for the Los Cuyes and Camp areas. SG measurements are determined using the water immersion method (weight in air versus weight in water). The SG data was collected by the operators in 1994/95 (TVX), 2004-2007 (Goldmarca / Ecometals), 2012 (EGX) and 2019-2023 (Luminex).

Typically, SG measurements were conducted on samples spaced at 10 m intervals down each drill hole.

The volume and distribution of SG data are considered sufficient to support calculation of average densities per rock type in the block models at Los Cuyes and Camp.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**10.5** **QAQC** 

There is no QAQC data were available for the TVX drilling programme.

From 2004 to August 2007, The Certified Reference Materials (CRMs or standards Standards), Blanks and quarter core duplicate samples were used on the Project. Some standards used mine waste material. However, due to high variability in analysis, these were no longer used.

The QAQC procedure from July 2007 to 2011 involved inserting a blank every 6 samples, a standard after 7 samples, a duplicate after 6 samples, followed by another blank. A random check indicated that this methodology was not strictly adhered to in terms of the number of blanks and standards. From July 2007, OREAS standards and blanks were used, mine waste material was no longer used.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 36

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

During the EGX drill programs from 2012 to 2014, Three types of control samples were inserted after every 20 samples as part of the QAQC procedure. These include certified reference standards, from CDN Resource Laboratories Ltd. (CDN) or OREAS, a blank (OREAS), and a quarter core duplicate sample.

Quality control failures for programs from 2012–2015 were addressed with programs of remedial assay analysis.

During the 2017–2018 drill program, QAQC samples are inserted after every six core samples. These include three certified standards (high, medium and low gold grades), a blank, and a coarse duplicate.

During the 2019–2021 drill program, QAQC samples are inserted with the insert rate about 2% - 4% for each type, including the certified standards, blank, coarse duplicate and fine duplicates.

From 2022 to 2023, drill program was conducted in Camp and Los Cuyes, QAQC samples are inserted with the insert rate about 1% - 4% for each type, including the certified standards, blank, coarse duplicate and fine duplicates.

A summary of QAQC samples is provided in Table 10.1.

**Table 10.1: Condor QAQC Samples During the Period 1994 to 2023**

---

| | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Period** | **Drilling Number** | **Diamond**<br> **Drilling (m)** | **Samples<br> Number** | **QC Samples**<br> **Type<sup>1</sup>** | **QC Samples<br> Number** | **QC Samples<br> %** |
| 1994 | 76 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;21365 | 13042 |  |  |  |
| 1995 | 110 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;19264 | 9820 |  |  |  |
| 1996 | 21 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5327 | 412 |  |  |  |
| 1999 | 10 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2523 | 1180 |  |  |  |
| 2000 | 13 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2961 | 1412 |  |  |  |
| 2004 | 5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;179 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;67 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;BLK<br> STD | 6<br> 4 | 8.96<br> 5.97 |
|  |  |  |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;BLK | 85 | 4.57 |
| 2005 | 55 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;4178 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1859 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;COARSE DUP | 30 | 1.61 |
|  |  |  |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;STD | 116 | 6.24 |
|  |  |  |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;BLK | 267 | 5.17 |
| 2006 | 38 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;10731 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5169 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;COARSE DUP | 183 | 3.54 |
|  |  |  |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;STD | 266 | 5.15 |
|  |  |  |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;BLK | 432 | 4.98 |
| 2007 | 55 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;17635 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;8673 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;COARSE DUP | 438 | 5.05 |
|  |  |  |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;STD | 445 | 5.13 |
|  |  |  |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;BLK | 16 | 5.39 |
| 2008 | 1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;600 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;297 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;FIELD DUP | 13 | 4.38 |
|  |  |  |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;STD | 16 | 5.39 |
|  |  |  |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;BLK | 170 | 5.89 |
| 2012 | 9 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5599 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2886 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;FIELD DUP | 170 | 5.89 |
|  |  |  |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;STD | 170 | 5.89 |

---

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 37

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

---

| | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Period** | **Drilling Number** | **Diamond**<br> **Drilling (m)** | **Samples<br> Number** | **QC Samples**<br> **Type<sup>1</sup>** | **QC Samples<br> Number** | **QC Samples<br> %** |
|  |  |  |  | BLK | 466 | 5.86 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2013 | 28 | 16452 | 7946 | COARSE DUP<br> FIELD DUP | 2<br> 465 | 0.03<br> 5.85 |
|  |  |  |  | STD | 466 | 5.86 |
|  |  |  |  | BLK | 45 | 5.80 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2017 | 7 | 1560 | 776 | COARSE DUP | 46 | 5.93 |
|  |  |  |  | STD | 45 | 5.80 |
|  |  |  |  | BLK | 10 | 5.75 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2018 | 2 | 347 | 174 | COARSE DUP | 10 | 5.75 |
|  |  |  |  | STD | 10 | 5.75 |
|  |  |  |  | COARSE BLK | 309 | 4.16 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2019 | 26 | 12900 | 7435 | COARSE DUP<br> FINE DUP | 207<br> 204 | 2.78<br> 2.74 |
|  |  |  |  | STD | 217 | 2.92 |
|  |  |  |  | COARSE BLK | 188 | 2.87 |
|  |  |  |  | COARSE DUP | 182 | 2.78 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2020 | 20 | 11124 | 6543 | FINE BLK | 81 | 1.24 |
|  |  |  |  | FINE DUP | 184 | 2.81 |
|  |  |  |  | STD | 184 | 2.81 |
|  |  |  |  | BLK | 2 | 0.11 |
|  |  |  |  | COARSE DUP | 48 | 2.75 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2021 | 9 | 3366 | 1748 | FINE BLK | 66 | 3.78 |
|  |  |  |  | FINE DUP | 49 | 2.80 |
|  |  |  |  | STD | 47 | 2.69 |
|  |  |  |  | COARSE DUP | 164 | 2.88 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2022 | 28 | 10355 | 6401 | FINE BLK<br> FINE DUP | 224<br> 152 | 3.93<br> 2.67 |
|  |  |  |  | STD | 160 | 2.81 |
|  |  |  |  | COARSE BLK | 41 | 0.88 |
|  |  |  |  | COARSE DUP | 120 | 2.57 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2023 | 16 | 7990 | 5249 | FINE BLK | 154 | 3.30 |
|  |  |  |  | FINE DUP | 116 | 2.49 |
|  |  |  |  | STD | 150 | 3.21 |

---

Sources: Summary by SRK based on CN_DH_Export_Database_8Sept2023.xlsx from Adventus

Note:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1. QC samples summary for includes data from Camp, Condor, Los Cuyes, Chinapintza, San Jose I, Guaya, Soledad, Enma, Conguime, El Hito,
Santa Barbara, Prometedor, Nayumbi, and Soledad Baja

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 38

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;10.6 Recommendations

The author of this report considers that quality control measures adopted for assaying of the Condor resource drilling have established that the assaying is representative and free of any biases or other factors that may materially impact the reliability of the analytical results. The author considers that the sample preparation, security and analytical procedures adopted for Condor drilling provide an adequate basis for the current Mineral Resource estimates.

The QP makes the following recommendations to improve and streamline procedures:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Only use one standard coarse blank material that should undergo
sample preparation along with the typical sample stream, to monitor for any between sample contamination during sample preparation.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ In addition to the review of the performance of QC data on
a batch-by-batch basis, analysis of the data over a longer term is recommended to assess for bias between the different laboratories,
and any changes in laboratory performance over time.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 39

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

11 Data Verification

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;11.1 Site Visit

The SRK team conducted the site inspections to the Condor project from June 19-20, 2024. They undertook the following verification steps:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Site inspection of the project area.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Meeting with Company representatives.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Discussions with geologists regarding sample collection,
sample preparation, sample storage, QAQC, geological interpretation.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Review of the outcrop, mineralization, faults (Figure 11.1),

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Inspection of drillhole sealing mark (Figure 11.2),

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Visually checking stratigraphy against interpreted drilling sections.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Visit the drill core store and core catalog room of Condor
Project, to understand the company's core storage protocols and procedures.

**Figure 11.1: Rock Outcrops at the Condor Project**

Source: SRK Site visit, 2024

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 40

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Figure 11.2: Condor Project Drillhole Sealing Mark**

![](ex99-1_023b.jpg)

Source: SRK Site visit, 2024

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;11.2 Historical Data Validation

During different exploration stages, the Condor project submitted technical reports at different times, describing the data verification by various Qualified Persons (QPs).

The 2021 NI 43-101 report made a summary of QAQC of Condor Project as below:

There is no QAQC data available for the TVX drilling programme.

A comprehensive review of QAQC from drilling and trench sampling programs prior to 2014 is provided in Maynard and Jones (2011 and 2014) and Hastings (2013). The reviews indicated that no QAQC data was available for the TVX drilling; however, very little of these drilling results are the subject of this report.

Lumina completed a resampling of the TVX holes from Los Cuyes as described in the 2018 Technical Report (Sim and Davis, 2018). Drill programs from 2004–2007 had a higher failure rate for gold in certified reference standards than would normally be acceptable; however, duplicate samples validated original assays. The failure rate for the 2007–2008 program was also higher than acceptable. Failures were found to be related to sample labelling errors rather than repeatability in resampled assays.

Quality control failures for programs from 2012–2015 were addressed with programs of remedial assay analysis. Following this extensive check program, quality control issues with drill programs carried out by previous operators were deemed by the authors to have been adequately addressed.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 41

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

For the Lumina/Luminex drill programs, a review of the QAQC protocols was conducted prior to drilling and formalized in a detailed QAQC manual developed by Lumina/Luminex. Each drilling phase was reviewed by a QP who was on site during the drill program. The procedures for core processing and the insertion of blanks and standards were examined. The QAQC program was conducted in accordance with industry best practices.

During the 2017–2018 drill program, 1,116 samples were analysed: 55 were blanks, 55 were certified reference material, 56 were coarse duplicates, and the remaining 950 samples were drilling core. After each batch of analytical results came in, the QAQC samples were reviewed by a Lumina geologist. Lumina's QAQC consultant also reviewed the data on a regular basis.

During the 2019–2021 drill program, 15,604 samples were analysed: 571 were blanks, 397 were certified reference material, 384 were fine duplicates, 386 were coarse duplicates, and the remaining 13,866 samples were drilling core. After each batch of analytical results came in, the QAQC samples were reviewed by a Luminex geologist. Luminex's QAQC consultant also reviewed the data on a regular basis.

Luminex's QAQC consultant confirmed that the results from drill programs throughout the 2019–2020 program are acceptable.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;11.3 Analytical Quality Control Data Validation

The SRK team was provided with the database named CN_DH_Export_Database_8Sept2023.xlsx which includes the QAQC data for several deposits from 1994 to 2023.

**Certified Reference Materials**

The monitoring of assay reliability of Camp, Los Cuyes, Soledad and Enma deposit included insertion of samples of certified reference materials (CRM).

The standards from Inspectorate Services were prepared from blended ore from the Condor project. The reported from 3.5 to 10.5% analytical variance of the standard material provided by Inspectorate is considered too high for use as reference material on the Condor project and no longer used from 2007.

The details are presented in Table 11.1.

**Table 11.1: Standards from Inspectorate Services Summary for the Condor Project**

---

| | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Manufacturer** | **Reference No** | **Matrix** | **Au**<br> **ppm** | **Au tolerance<br> (ppm)** | **Au variance<br> (%)** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Inspectorate Services Peru | GEO-184 STD-1 | Condor blended ore | 1.05 | 0.11 | 10.48% |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Inspectorate Services Peru | GEO-269 STD-2 | Condor blended ore | 2.23 | 0.21 | 9.42% |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Inspectorate Services Peru | GEO-273 STD-3 | Condor blended ore | 3.19 | 0.3 | 9.40% |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Inspectorate Services Peru | GEO-309 STD-4 | Condor blended ore | 3.82 | 0.13 | 3.40% |

---

Source: 20070824_SRM_CertifiedReferenceMaterial_QAQC

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 42

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

The majority of the CRM material was however sourced from CDN Resource Laboratories Ltd. (CDN) or OREAS (Table 11.2). The CRMs used in Condor Project are summarized in Table 11.3.

**Table 11.2: CRM Reference Value Summary for the Condor Project**

---

| | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Reference Value** | **Reference Value** | **Reference Value** | **2 Standard Deviation** | **2 Standard Deviation** | **2 Standard Deviation** | | |
| <br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**CRM ID** | **Au<br> g/t** | **Cu<br> %** | **Ag<br> g/t** | **Au** | **Cu** | **Ag** | <br>**In Use** | <br>**Count of Sample** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;12a | 11.79 |  |  | 0.48 |  |  | 2012 | 8 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;152a | 0.116 | 0.385 |  | 0.01 | 0.019 |  | 2012 | 3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;15Pa | 1.02 |  |  | 0.05 |  |  | 2007-2012 | 38 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;15Pc | 1.61 |  |  | 0.09 |  |  | 2007-2013 | 44 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;15d | 1.559 |  |  | 0.084 |  |  | 2012-2013 | 11 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;15g | 0.527 |  |  | 0.046 |  |  | 2012 | 54 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;15h | 1.019 |  |  | 0.05 |  |  | 2012 | 14 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;17Pb | 2.56 |  |  | 0.23 |  |  | 2007-2013 | 37 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;18Pb | 3.62 |  |  | 0.14 |  |  | 2007-2008 | 27 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2Pd | 0.885 |  |  | 0.058 |  |  | 2012-2013 | 16 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;503 | 0.687 | 0.566 | 1.63 | 0.048 | 0.0306 | 0.24 | 2013 | 21 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;504c | 1.48 | 1.11 | 4.22 | 0.09 | 0.06 | 0.576 | 2019-2023 | 146 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;505 | 0.555 | 0.321 | 1.53 | 0.028 | 0.016 | 0.144 | 2021-2022 | 29 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;53P | 0.38 | 0.413 |  | 0.038 | 0.032 |  | 2007-2013 | 30 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;54Pa | 2.9 | 1.55 |  | 0.22 | 0.05 |  | 2013 | 2 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;61Pa | 4.46 |  | 8.54 | 0.27 |  | 0.7 | 2007-2008 | 27 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;62d | 9.64 |  |  | 0.64 |  |  | 2012 | 7 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;62Pa | 10.5 |  | 8.37 | 0.66 |  | 1.36 | 2007-2008 | 21 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;67a | 2.238 | 0.0325 | 33.6 | 0.192 | 0.002 | 4 | 2012-2013 | 8 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;68a | 3.89 | 0.0392 | 42.9 | 0.3 | 0.003 | 3.4 | 2012-2013 | 10 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7Pb | 2.77 |  |  | 0.11 |  |  | 2007-2013 | 28 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;CDN-CM-14 | 0.792 | 1.058 |  | 0.078 | 0.062 |  | 2013 | 25 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;CDN-CM-25 | 0.228 | 0.191 |  | 0.03 | 0.006 |  | 2013 | 53 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;CDN-CM-26 | 0.372 | 0.246 |  | 0.048 | 0.016 |  | 2013 | 168 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;CDN-CM-27 | 0.636 | 0.592 |  | 0.068 | 0.03 |  | 2017-2022 | 169 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;CDN-CM-28 | 1.38 | 1.36 |  | 0.17 | 0.08 |  | 2017-2019 | 60 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;CDN-CM-30 | 1.3 | 0.73 | 15.9 | 0.12 | 0.034 | 1.3 | 2013 | 88 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;CDN-CM-36 | 0.316 | 0.23 | 2.1 | 0.034 | 0.01 | 0.2 | 2017-2018 | 18 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;CDN-CM-43 | 0.309 | 0.233 |  | 0.04 | 0.012 |  | 2019-2020 | 110 |

---

Sources: Summary by SRK based on CRMS certificate and the file CN_DH_Export_Database_8Sept2023.xlsx from Adventus

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 43

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Table 11.3: CRM Usage at the Condor Project**

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Area** | **QAQC_ID** | **Count of Sample** | **In Use** |
|  | 504c | 68 | 2019-2020&2022 |
| Camp Condor | 505 | 18 | 2022 |
|  | CDN-CM-27 | 134 | 2019-2020&2022 |
|  | CDN-CM-28 | 42 | 2019 |
|  | CDN-CM-43 | 105 | 2019-2020 |
|  | 15Pc | 2 | 2007 |
|  | 17Pb | 1 | 2007 |
|  | 18Pb | 1 | 2007 |
|  | 504c | 1 | 2021 |
|  | 53P | 1 | 2007 |
| Enma | 61Pa | 1 | 2007 |
|  | 62Pa | 1 | 2007 |
|  | 7Pb | 1 | 2007 |
|  | CDN-CM-27 | 1 | 2021 |
|  | STD-0 | 26 | 2005 |
|  | STD-1 | 29 | 2005 |
|  | STD-2 | 58 | 2005 |
|  | STD-3 | 54 | 2005 |
|  | STD-4 | 19 | 2005 |
|  | 12a | 8 | 2012 |
|  | 15g | 7 | 2012 |
|  | 15Pa | 13 | 2007 |
|  | 15Pc | 9 | 2007 |
|  | 17Pb | 13 | 2007 |
|  | 18Pb | 12 | 2007 |
|  | 504c | 74 | 2020-2023 |
|  | 505 | 11 | 2021-2022 |
| Los Cuyes | 53P | 10 | 2007 |
|  | 61Pa | 13 | 2007 |
|  | 62d | 7 | 2012 |
|  | 62Pa | 9 | 2007 |
|  | 7Pb | 11 | 2007 |
|  | CDN-CM-27 | 12 | 2020-2022 |
|  | STD-0 | 5 | 2004 |
|  | STD-1 | 56 | 2005 |
|  | STD-2 | 61 | 2004 |
|  | STD-3 | 62 | 2004 |
|  | STD-4 | 50 | 2006 |
|  | 15g | 42 | 2012 |
| Soledad | 15h | 3 | 2012 |
|  | 15Pa | 22 | 2007&2012 |
|  | 15Pc | 22 | 2007 |
|  | 17Pb | 15 | 2007 |

---

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 44

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Area** | **QAQC_ID** | **Count of Sample** | **In Use** |
|  | 18Pb | 12 | 2007 |
|  | 2Pd | 5 | 2012 |
|  | 504c | 3 | 2020 |
|  | 53P | 15 | 2007 |
|  | 61Pa | 11 | 2007 |
|  | 62Pa | 10 | 2007 |
|  | 7Pb | 13 | 2007 |
|  | CDN-CM-27 | 3 | 2020 |
|  | CDN-CM-43 | 5 | 2020 |
|  | STD-1 | 33 | 2006 |
|  | STD-2 | 39 | 2006 |
|  | STD-3 | 33 | 2006 |

---

Sources: Summary by SRK based on CN_DH_Export_Database_8Sept2023.xlsx from Adventus

Due to the large number of standard samples used, SRK chose some CRMs with more than 3 samples to be statistically significant for verification. Detailed statistics and standard performance are presented in Table 11.4 to Table 11.7 and Figure 11.3 to Figure 11.5. The insertion rates of QAQC samples has varied significantly over the projects history, and no consistent standard (SRK recommend a minimum of 1 QAQC sample in 20 or 5%).

**Table 11.4: Selected CRM Results Summary for the Camp deposit**

---

| | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | | **Statistics** | **CDN-CM-43 (Au)** | **CDN-CM-27 (Au)** | **CDN-CM-28 (Au)** |
| Project | Camp | Sample Count | 105 | 105 |  |
| Data Series | 2019-2020 | Expected Value | 0.31 | 0.23 |  |
| Data Type | Core Samples | Standard | 0.04 | 0.02 |  |
|  |  | Deviation |  |  |  |
| Commodity | Au, Cu | Data Mean | 0.29 | 0.23 |  |
| Laboratory |  | Outside 2StdDev | 19% | 7% |  |
| Analytical Method |  | Below 2StdDev | 17 | 2 |  |
| Detection Limit |  | Above 2StdDev | 3 | 5 |  |
|  |  | **Statistics** | **CDN-CM-28 (Au)** | **CDN-CM-28 (Cu)** |  |
| Project | Camp | Sample Count | 41 | 42 |  |
| Data Series | 2019 | Expected Value | 1.38 | 1.36 |  |
| Data Type | Core Samples | Standard Deviation | 0.17 | 0.03 |  |
| Commodity | Au, Cu | Data Mean | 1.41 | 1.33 |  |
| Laboratory |  | Outside 2StdDev | 12% | 2% |  |
| Analytical Method |  | Below 2StdDev | 2 | 1 |  |
| Detection Limit |  | Above 2StdDev | 3 | 0 |  |
|  |  | **Statistics** | **CDN-CM-27 (Au)** | **CDN-CM-27(Cu)** |  |
| Project |  | Sample Count | 132 | 134 |  |
| Data Series | 2019-<br> 2020&2022 | Expected Value | 0.64 | 0.59 |  |

---

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 45

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

---

| | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
|  | | **Statistics** | **CDN-CM-43 (Au)** | **CDN-CM-27 (Au)** | **CDN-CM-28 (Au)** |
| Data Type | Core Samples | Standard <br> Deviation | 0.07 | 0.04 |  |
| Commodity | Au, Cu | Data Mean | 0.64 | 0.59 |  |
| Laboratory |  | Outside 2StdDev | 12% | 5% |  |
| Analytical Method |  | Below 2StdDev | 4 | 5 |  |
| Detection Limit |  | Above 2StdDev | 12 | 2 |  |
|  |  | **Statistics** | **504c (Au)** | **504c (Ag)** | **504c (Cu)** |
| Project |  | Sample Count | 68 | 68 | 68 |
| Data Series | 2019- | Expected Value | 1.48 | 4.22 | 1.11 |
|  | 2020&2022 |  |  |  |  |
| Data Type | Core Samples | Standard | 0.09 | 0.58 | 0.27 |
|  |  | Deviation |  |  |  |
| Commodity | Au, Ag, Cu | Data Mean | 1.45 | 4.36 | 1.09 |
| Laboratory |  | Outside 2StdDev | 3% | 12% | 4% |
| Analytical Method |  | Below 2StdDev | 2 | 0 | 3 |
| Detection Limit |  | Above 2StdDev | 0 | 8 | 0 |
|  |  | **Statistics** | **505 (Au)** | **505 (Ag)** | **505 (Cu)** |
| Project |  | Sample Count | 18 | 18 | 18 |
| Data Series | 2019-<br> 2020&2022 | Expected Value | 0.56 | 1.53 | 0.32 |
| Data Type | Core Samples | Standard | 0.03 | 0.14 | 0.25 |
|  |  | Deviation |  |  |  |
| Commodity | Au, Ag, Cu | Data Mean | 0.52 | 1.38 | 0.31 |
| Laboratory |  | Outside 2StdDev | 11% | 28% | 6% |
| Analytical Method |  | Below 2StdDev | 2 | 4 | 1 |
| Detection Limit |  | Above 2StdDev | 0 | 1 | 0 |

---

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 46

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Figure 11.3: Selected CRMs Performances for the Camp Deposit**

---

| |
|:---|
| ![](ex99-1_023c.jpg) |
| ![](ex99-1_023d.jpg) |
| ![](ex99-1_023e.jpg) |
| ![](ex99-1_023f.jpg) |

---

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 47

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Table 11.5: Selected CRM Results Summary for the Los Cuyes deposit**

---

| | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
|  |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Statistics** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**17Pb (Au)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**7Pb (Au)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**18Pb (Au)** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Project | &nbsp;&nbsp;Los Cuyes | &nbsp;&nbsp;Sample Count | &nbsp;&nbsp;13 | &nbsp;&nbsp;11 | &nbsp;&nbsp;12 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Data Series | &nbsp;&nbsp;2007 | &nbsp;&nbsp;Expected Value | &nbsp;&nbsp;2.56 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2.77 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3.62 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Data Type | &nbsp;&nbsp;Core Samples | &nbsp;&nbsp;Standard <br> Deviation | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.23 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.11 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.14 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Commodity | &nbsp;&nbsp;Au | &nbsp;&nbsp;Data Mean | &nbsp;&nbsp;2.61 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2.74 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3.54 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Laboratory |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Outside 2StdDev | &nbsp;&nbsp;0% | &nbsp;&nbsp;27% | &nbsp;&nbsp;25% |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Analytical Method |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Below 2StdDev | &nbsp;&nbsp;0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Detection Limit |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Above 2StdDev | &nbsp;&nbsp;0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1 |
|  |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Statistics** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**53P (Au)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**53P (Cu)** |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Project |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Sample Count | &nbsp;&nbsp;10 | &nbsp;&nbsp;10 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Data Series | &nbsp;&nbsp;2007 | &nbsp;&nbsp;Expected Value | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.38 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.41 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Data Type | &nbsp;&nbsp;Core Samples | &nbsp;&nbsp;Standard <br> Deviation | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.04 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.01 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Commodity | &nbsp;&nbsp;Au,Cu | &nbsp;&nbsp;Data Mean | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.38 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.41 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Laboratory |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Outside 2StdDev | &nbsp;&nbsp;0% | &nbsp;&nbsp;0% |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Analytical Method |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Below 2StdDev | &nbsp;&nbsp;0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Detection Limit |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Above 2StdDev | &nbsp;&nbsp;0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0 |  |
|  |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Statistics** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**504c (Au)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**504c (Ag)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**504c (Cu)** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Project |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Sample Count | &nbsp;&nbsp;70 | &nbsp;&nbsp;74 | &nbsp;&nbsp;73 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Data Series | &nbsp;&nbsp;2020-2023 | &nbsp;&nbsp;Expected Value | &nbsp;&nbsp;1.48 | &nbsp;&nbsp;4.22 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1.11 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Data Type | &nbsp;&nbsp;Core Samples | &nbsp;&nbsp;Standard <br> Deviation | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.09 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.58 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.77 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Commodity | &nbsp;&nbsp;Au,Ag,Cu | &nbsp;&nbsp;Data Mean | &nbsp;&nbsp;1.42 | &nbsp;&nbsp;4.02 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1.07 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Laboratory |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Outside 2StdDev | &nbsp;&nbsp;16% | &nbsp;&nbsp;19% | &nbsp;&nbsp;10% |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Analytical Method |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Below 2StdDev | &nbsp;&nbsp;11 | &nbsp;&nbsp;9 | &nbsp;&nbsp;7 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Detection Limit |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Above 2StdDev | &nbsp;&nbsp;0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0 |
|  |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Statistics | &nbsp;&nbsp;**505 (Au)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**505 (Ag)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**505 (Cu)** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Project |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Sample Count | &nbsp;&nbsp;11 | &nbsp;&nbsp;11 | &nbsp;&nbsp;11 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Data Series | &nbsp;&nbsp;2021-2022 | &nbsp;&nbsp;Expected Value | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.56 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1.53 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.32 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Data Type | &nbsp;&nbsp;Core Samples | &nbsp;&nbsp;Standard <br> Deviation | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.03 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.14 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.10 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Commodity | &nbsp;&nbsp;Au,Ag,Cu | &nbsp;&nbsp;Data Mean | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.54 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1.45 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.32 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Laboratory |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Outside 2StdDev | &nbsp;&nbsp;27% | &nbsp;&nbsp;18% | &nbsp;&nbsp;9% |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Analytical Method |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Below 2StdDev | &nbsp;&nbsp;3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Detection Limit |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Above 2StdDev | &nbsp;&nbsp;0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1 |

---

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 48

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Figure 11.4: Selected CRMs Performances for the Los Cuyes Deposit**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| ![](ex99-1_005.jpg) | ![](ex99-1_006.jpg) |
| ![](ex99-1_007.jpg) | ![](ex99-1_008.jpg) |
| ![](ex99-1_009.jpg) | ![](ex99-1_010.jpg) |
| ![](ex99-1_011.jpg) | ![](ex99-1_012.jpg) |

---

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 49

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Table 11.6: Selected CRM Results Summary for the Soledad Deposit**

---

| | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | | **Statistics** | **7Pb (Au)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**61Pa (Au)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**62Pa (Au)** |
| Project | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Soledad | Sample Count | 13 | &nbsp;&nbsp;11 | &nbsp;&nbsp;10 |
| Data Series | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2007 | Expected Value | 2.77 | &nbsp;&nbsp;4.46 | &nbsp;&nbsp;10.50 |
| Data Type | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Core Samples | Standard Deviation | 0.11 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.70 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.66 |
| Commodity | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Au | Data Mean | 2.72 | &nbsp;&nbsp;4.48 | &nbsp;&nbsp;9.72 |
| Laboratory |  | Outside 2StdDev | 8% | &nbsp;&nbsp;0% | &nbsp;&nbsp;60% |
| Analytical Method |  | Below 2StdDev | 1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;6 |
| Detection Limit |  | Above 2StdDev | 0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0 |
|  |  | **Statistics** | **53P (Au)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**17Pb (Au)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**18Pb (Au)** |
| Project |  | Sample Count | 15 | &nbsp;&nbsp;15 | &nbsp;&nbsp;12 |
| Data Series | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2007 | Expected Value | 0.38 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2.56 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3.62 |
| Data Type | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Core Samples | Standard Deviation | 0.04 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.23 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.14 |
| Commodity | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Au | Data Mean | 0.45 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2.45 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3.54 |
| Laboratory |  | Outside 2StdDev | 33% | &nbsp;&nbsp;13% | &nbsp;&nbsp;25% |
| Analytical Method |  | Below 2StdDev | 0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3 |
| Detection Limit |  | Above 2StdDev | 5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0 |
|  |  | **Statistics** | **15g (Au)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;15h (Au) | &nbsp;&nbsp;15Pc (Au) |
| Project |  | Sample Count | 42 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;22 |
| Data Series | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2012 | Expected Value | 0.53 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1.02 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1.61 |
| Data Type | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Core Samples | Standard Deviation | 0.05 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.05 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.09 |
| Commodity | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Au | Data Mean | 0.74 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1.00 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.97 |
| Laboratory |  | Outside 2StdDev | 62% | &nbsp;&nbsp;0% | &nbsp;&nbsp;100% |
| Analytical Method |  | Below 2StdDev | 3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;22 |
| Detection Limit |  | Above 2StdDev | 23 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0 |
|  |  | **Statistics** | **15Pa (Au)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**2Pd (Au)** |  |
| Project |  | Sample Count | 22 | &nbsp;&nbsp;5 |  |
| Data Series | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2007&2012 | Expected Value | 1.02 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.89 |  |
| Data Type | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Core Samples | Standard Deviation | 0.05 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.06 |  |
| Commodity | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Au | Data Mean | 0.97 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.89 |  |
| Laboratory |  | Outside 2StdDev | 23% | &nbsp;&nbsp;0% |  |
| Analytical Method |  | Below 2StdDev | 5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0 |  |
| Detection Limit |  | Above 2StdDev | 0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0 |  |

---

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 50

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Figure 11.5: Selected CRMs Performances for the Soledad Deposit**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| ![](ex99-1_026.jpg) | ![](ex99-1_027.jpg) |
| ![](ex99-1_028.jpg) | ![](ex99-1_029.jpg) |
| ![](ex99-1_030.jpg) | ![](ex99-1_031.jpg) |
| ![](ex99-1_032.jpg) | ![](ex99-1_033.jpg) |

---

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 51

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Table 11.7: Selected CRM Results Summary for the Enma Deposit**

---

| | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | | **Statistics** | **15Pc (Au)** | **17Pb (Au)** | **18Pb (Au)** |
| Project | Enma | 2 | 1 | 1 | 18 |
| Data Series | 2007 | 1.61 | 2.56 | 3.62 | 0.23 |
| Data Type | Core Samples | 0.09 | 0.23 | 0.14 | 0.01 |
| Commodity | Au | 1.28 | 2.64 | 3.59 | 0.22 |
| Laboratory |  | 50% | 0% | 0% | 11% |
| Analytical Method |  | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Detection Limit |  | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|  |  | **Statistics** | **15Pc (Au)** | **17Pb (Au)** | **18Pb (Au)** |
| Project |  | Sample Count | 2 | 1 | 1 |
| Data Series | 2007 | Expected Value | 1.61 | 2.56 | 3.62 |
| Data Type | Core Samples | Standard Deviation | 0.09 | 0.23 | 0.14 |
| Commodity | Au | Data Mean | 1.28 | 2.64 | 3.59 |
| Laboratory |  | Outside 2StdDev | 50% | 0% | 0% |
| Analytical Method |  | Below 2StdDev | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Detection Limit |  | Above 2StdDev | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|  |  | **Statistics** | **7Pb (Au)** |  |  |
| Project |  | Sample Count | 1 |  |  |
| Data Series | 2007 | Expected Value | 2.77 |  |  |
| Data Type | Core Samples | Standard Deviation | 0.11 |  |  |
| Commodity | Au | Data Mean | 2.75 |  |  |
| Laboratory |  | Outside 2StdDev | 0% |  |  |
| Analytical Method |  | Below 2StdDev | 0 |  |  |
| Detection Limit |  | Above 2StdDev | 0 |  |  |
|  |  | **Statistics** | **504c (Au)** | **504c (Ag)** | **504c (Cu)** |
| Project |  | Sample Count | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Data Series | 2021 | Expected Value | 1.48 | 4.22 | 1.11 |
| Data Type | Core Samples | Standard Deviation | 0.09 | 0.58 | 0.06 |
| Commodity | Au,Ag,Cu | Data Mean | 1.49 | 4.00 | 1.09 |
| Laboratory |  | Outside 2StdDev | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| Analytical Method |  | Below 2StdDev | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Detection Limit |  | Above 2StdDev | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|  |  | **Statistics** | **CDN-CM-27 (Au)** | **CDN-CM-27(Cu)** |  |
| Project |  | Sample Count | 1 | 1 |  |
| Data Series | 2012 | Expected Value | 0.64 | 0.59 |  |
| Data Type | Core Samples | Standard Deviation | 0.07 | 0.03 |  |
| Commodity | Au | Data Mean | 0.62 | 0.58 |  |
| Laboratory |  | Outside 2StdDev | 0% | 0% |  |
| Analytical Method |  | Below 2StdDev | 0 | 0 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Detection Limit |  | Above 2StdDev | 0 | 0 |  |

---

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 52

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Blanks**

Condor utilized six different types of blank material. The details of blanks submitted to the analytical laboratories are shown in Table 11.8 with control charts for Au shown in Figure 11.6. The Au results are representative of the other analysed variables and indicate that there is not regular between sample contamination during the sample preparation process.

**Table 11.8: Blanks Summary for the Condor Project**

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Area** | **QAQC_ID** | **QC Samples Number** | **In Use** |
| Camp | Glass-LAC | 536 | 2019-2020&2022 |
|  | 22P | 7 | 2007 |
| Enma | BLK | 157 | 2005-2007 |
|  | Glass-LAC | 6 | 2021 |
|  | 22b | 22 | 2012 |
| Los Cuyes | 22P | 81 | 2007 |
|  | BLK | 235 | 2004-2007 |
|  | Glass-LAC | 298 | 2020-2023 |
|  | 22b | 56 | 2012 |
| Soledad | 22P | 99 | 2007 |
|  | BLK | 147 | 2006-2007 |
|  | Glass-LAC | 13 | 2020 |
|  | 22b | 18 | 2012 |
|  | 22d | 192 | 2013 |
| Santa Barbara | 22P | 15 | 2008 |
|  | 23a | 229 | 2012-2013 |
|  | BLK | 1 | 2008 |
|  | Glass-LAC | 55 | 2017-2018 |

---

**Figure 11.6: Selected Blanks Performances Charts for Au**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| ![](ex99-1_034.jpg) | ![](ex99-1_035.jpg) |
| Camp | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Enma |

---

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 53

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Figure 11.6: Selected Blanks Performances Charts for Au**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| ![](ex99-1_036.jpg) | ![](ex99-1_037.jpg) |
| Los Cuyes | Soledad |

---

**Duplicates**

The Condor Project QAQC protocols include the insertion of field duplicates, coarse reject duplicates, and pulp duplicates. The summary of duplicates for the Condor Project is shown in Table 11.9.

The generally accepted criterion recommended by the QP are as follows:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Field duplicates: 80% samples should have a half absolute relative
difference (HARD) less than 20%.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Coarse duplicates: 80% samples should have a HARD less than
20%.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Pulp duplicates: 90% samples should have a HARD less than 10%.

The Scatter and HARD plots of field duplicates, coarse duplicates and pulp duplicates for gold are presented from Figure 11.7 to Figure 11.9.

**Table 11.9: Duplicates Summary for the Condor Project**

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Area** | **QC Type** | **In Use** | **QC Samples Number** |
| Camp | COARSE DUP | 2019-2022 | 383 |
|  | FINE DUP | 2019-2022 | 375 |
| Enma | COARSE DUP | 2005-2021 | 14 |
|  | FINE DUP | 2021-2021 | 3 |
|  | COARSE DUP | 2004-2023 | 512 |
| Los Cuyes | FIELD DUP | 2012 | 22 |
|  | FINE DUP | 2020-2023 | 215 |
|  | COARSE DUP | 2007-2020 | 14 |
| Soledad | FIELD DUP | 2012 | 56 |
|  | FINE DUP | 2020 | 10 |

---

The coarse duplicates show relatively good repeatability in the following charts. There is a relatively low scatter round the deal correlation line, and the HARD plot shows that more than 80% of the pairs have a HARD value of less than 20%.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 54

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Figure 11.7: Coarse Duplicates Scatter and HARD Plot for Gold**

The field duplicates show a lower repeatability than the coarse (crusher) duplicates. The coarse duplicates do not meet the expected precision defined by 8% of the pairs having a HARD value of less than 20%. This is an indication of a high nugget effect in the data.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 55

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Figure 11.8: Field Duplicates Scatter and HARD Plot for Gold**

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 56

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

The scatter plot shows good repeatability and low scatter in the scatter plot in Figure 11.9. While the HARD plot indicates that the expected precision is not achieved (90% of the pairs with a HARD value of less than 10%) the performance of the pulp duplicates is still considered acceptable for a deposit with coarse gold.

**Figure 11.9: Pulp Duplicates Scatter and HARD Plot for the Gold**

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 57

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Umpire Samples**

There are only the umpire samples assay of Au in 2005 and Au assay of drill hole DCU-17B in 2011 for Los Cuyes Deposit are available. The performance is shown in Figure 11.10. For drill hole DCU-17B the correlation is generally good below 10 g/t. The ALS Chemex data appears to be reported to an upper limit of 10 g./t, and the over limit values are not reported.

**Figure 11.10: Umpire Samples Scatter for the Los Cuyes Deposit**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| ![](ex99-1_041.jpg) | ![](ex99-1_042.jpg) |

---

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;11.4 Recommendations and Conclusions

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ The QP is of the opinion that core sampling, logging and storage
procedures are standardized, and that the analytical methods and processes generally comply with industry standards.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ The exploration team at the Condor Project demonstrated competence
with respect to the managing, assessment and correction of analytic QAQC data.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ The bias observed in some lower grades may be as a result of
the Laboratory lower detection limits.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ There are insufficient samples to be statistically significant
for the Enma deposit.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Overall, the QAQC monitoring program is consistent with common
industry practice and demonstrates acceptable accuracy and precision for the analytical results.

SRK recommends that:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ SVM revise their protocols so that QC samples are inserted using
a systematic approach at a rate of 1 sample in every 20 samples (5%).

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Continue to submit all QAQC samples (with no identification),
so that the results are not known by the laboratory.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 58

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Validate the QAQC datasets to enable consistent year-to-year
reporting of results. Laboratory and Laboratory report IDs should also be fully populated in the assay and QAQC databases.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Address over limit issues with the umpire laboratory assays.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Submit at least 5% of drilling samples to a third-party umpire
laboratory for check analysis on a regular basis.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 59

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

12 Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;12.1 Introduction

The metallurgical testing was reviewed by Mr Lanliang Niu, a professional engineer with SRK CN with over 30 years' experience in processing testing and studies, production management and technical consultancy service.

Plenge Laboratory in Lima, Peru and other laboratories conducted mineralogical studies and metallurgical tests on composite samples of the gold deposits of Condor Project. The list of reports is as follows:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Breccias - San Jose - Ecuador, Direct Cyaniding Metallurgical
Testwork, May 2004, Goldmarca Mining Peru S.A.C.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ San Jose Ore Evaluation Testwork, Condor Gold Project for Goldmarca
Limited, May 2006, Independent Metallurgical Laboratories Pty Ltd.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Report of Investigation No. 18525, Condor Project Base Camp
Samples Progress Report. dated July 24, 2020. Plenge Laboratory.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Report of Investigation No.18525-73-89, Progress Report, Luminex
Condor North Project, Camp, Los Cuyes, Enma Samples, May 26, 2021, by C.H. Plenge & C.I.A. S.A. of Lima, Peru.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Report of Investigation No. 18702, Condor Project Los Cuyes
West (High Grade, Low Grade), Breccia Pipe, dated August 29, 2023. Plenge Laboratory.

SRK reviewed these reports above and summarized the testing results in this section.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;12.2 Los Cuyes West

Three composite samples known as Los Cuyes West low-grade ore, Los Cuyes West high-grade ore and Breccia Pipe ore were tested by Plenge Laboratory in August 2023. The tests and results are summarized below.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;12.2.1 Head Assay and Mineral Composition

A representative split from each sample and the Master Composite (MC) formed by taking equal parts of each sample were assayed as shown in Table 12.1. Bulk mineralogy by powder XRD is shown in Table 12.2.

Quartz and muscovite represent roughly 80% of the siliceous gangue while pyrite represents the major sulphide gangue ranging from 5.3% for Los Cuyes West to 7.1% for Brecia Pipe. The zinc and lead sulphides are present as sphalerite (ZnS) and galena (PbS).

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 60

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Table 12.1: Head Assays for Los Cuyes West and Breccia Pipe Samples**

---

| | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | | **Los Cuyes **West** | **Los Cuyes **West** | | |
| <br>&nbsp;&nbsp;**Element** | <br>**Unit** | **Low Grade** | **High Grade** | **Breccia Pipe**<br>**Mean Grade** | **Master**<br>**Composite** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Ag | g/t | 12 | 41.7 | 11.4 | 21.7 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Au1 | g/t | 0.738 | 3.797 | 1.110 | 1.882 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Au2 | g/t | 0.712 | 3.499 | 1.006 | 1.739 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Au Average | g/t | 0.725 | 3.648 | 1.058 | 1.81 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Cu | % | 0.02 | 0.06 | 0.04 | 0.04 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Pb | % | 0.05 | 0.22 | 0.02 | 0.10 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Zn | % | 0.40 | 0.91 | 0.43 | 0.58 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Fe | % | 5.36 | 7.19 | 4.93 | 5.83 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;As | g/t | 33 | 518 | 35 | 195 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;S total | % | 3.11 | 5.42 | 3.22 | 3.92 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;C total | % | 0.46 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.47 |

---

Source: Report of Investigation No.18702, August 29, 2023, Plenge Laboratory

**Table 12.2: Bulk Mineralogy by XRD for Los Cuyes West and Breccia Pipe Samples**

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
|  | **Distribution %** | **Distribution %** | |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Mineral** | **Los Cuyes West** | **Los Cuyes West** | |
|  | **Low Grade** | **High Grade** | <br>**Breccia Pipe** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Quartz | 47.2 | 48.1 | 52.1 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Muscovite | 33.4 | 33.7 | 27.5 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Chamosite | 5.6 | 3.9 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Pyrite | 5.3 | 5.3 | 7.1 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Illite | 1.1 | 1 | 2.4 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Sphalerite | 0.7 | 0.7 | 1.4 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Kaolinite |  | 1 | 1.7 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Alunite |  |  | 1.2 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Others | 6.7 | 6.3 | 6.6 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Total | 100 | 100 | 100 |

---

Source: Report of Investigation No.18702, August 29, 2023, Plenge Laboratory

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;12.2.2 Gravity Concentration

An exploratory gravity concentration test was performed in a laboratory Falcon 4B centrifugal concentrator at a grind size of P80=210µm and the concentrate was cleaned once by panning yielding the results as shown in Table 12.3. The concentrate mass pull was 0.2% and the gold recovery is 14.9%. The test results suggest the presence of gravity recoverable gold.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 61

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Table 12.3: Gravity Concentration for Master Composite of Los Cuyes and Breccia Pipe**

---

| | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Product** | **Yield%** | **Grad**<br> **Ag** | **e, g/t**<br> **Au** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; **Recovery, %**<br> **Ag** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <br>**Au** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Gravity Concentrate | 0.20 | 549.5 | 134.3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;14.9 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Tail | 99.8 | 20.1 | 1.53 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;94.8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;85.1 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Head calculated | 100.0 | 21.2 | 1.79 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;100.0 | 100.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Head assayed |  | 21.7 | 1.81 |  |  |

---

Source: Report of Investigation No.18702, August 29, 2023, Plenge Laboratory

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;12.2.3 Cyanidation

Whole ore cyanidation (WOCN) and CIL were explored at 100% passing 10 Mesh (2mm) and P80=75µm at cyanide concentration of 1.0 g/L NaCN. The results are listed in Table 12.4 and shown in Figure 12.1 for gold dissolution rate and in Figure 12.2 for silver dissolution rate.

The highest gold extractions were achieved for Los Cuyes West High Grade at 94.5% followed Los Cuyes Low West grade at 91.1% and lastly for Breccia Pipe at 87.1%. The low silver extraction are expected due to the presence of silver sulphides. The gold extractions of CIL cyanide leach were a little bit higher than that of standard WOCN suggesting a slight preg-robbing effect.

**Table 12.4: Whole Ore Cyanidation Results for Los Cuyes West and Breccia Pipe**

---

| | | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | **Reagent** | **Reagent** |  |
|  |  | **Head Calcd g/t** | **Head Calcd g/t** | **Residue g/t** | **Residue g/t** | **Extraction<sup>1</sup> %** | **Extraction<sup>1</sup> %** | **Consumption** | **Consumption** | **NaCN Add** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Size** | **Process** |  |  |  |  |  |  | **kg/t** | **kg/t** | **kg/t** |
|  |  | **Ag** | **Au** | **Ag** | **Au** | **Ag** | **Au** | **NaCN** | **CaO** |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Los Cuyes West (Low Grade)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Los Cuyes West (Low Grade)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Los Cuyes West (Low Grade)** |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;100%-10M | STD | 12.8 | 0.732 | 9 | 0.29 | 29.5 | 60.3 | 0.39 | 1.1 | 2.65 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;P<sub>80</sub>=75µm | STD | 12.8 | 0.732 | 8.4 | 0.09 | 34.3 | 87.2 | 0.66 | 1 | 1.80 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;P<sub>80</sub>=75µm | CIL | 12.1 | 0.740 | 7.9 | 0.07 | 34.4 | 91.1 | 1.25 | 1 | 1.97 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Los Cuyes West (High Grade)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Los Cuyes West (High Grade)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Los Cuyes West (High Grade)** |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;100%-10M | STD | 41.4 | 3.900 | 29.4 | 1.51 | 29 | 61.3 | 1.01 | 1.5 | 3.64 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;P<sub>80</sub>=75µm | STD | 42.2 | 3.829 | 25.8 | 0.36 | 39 | 90.5 | 1.35 | 1.3 | 2.21 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;P<sub>80</sub>=75µm | CIL | 40.4 | 3.860 | 27.4 | 0.21 | 32.2 | 94.5 | 1.93 | 1.1 | 2.41 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Breccia Pipe** |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;100%-10M | STD | 12.1 | 1.040 | 8.6 | 0.49 | 28.8 | 52.8 | 0.54 | 1.4 | 3.03 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;P<sub>80</sub>=75µm | STD | 12.4 | 1.016 | 8.5 | 0.15 | 31.5 | 85.3 | 0.79 | 1.2 | 1.90 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;P<sub>80</sub>=75µm | CIL | 10.8 | 1.011 | 7.1 | 0.13 | 34.2 | 87.1 | 1.56 | 1 | 2.15 |

---

Source: Report of Investigation No.18702, August 29, 2023, Plenge Laboratory

Notes: <sup>1</sup>The extraction is calculated with respect to the head calculated.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 62

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Figure 12.1: Gold Leach Curves of WOCN for Los Cuyes West and Breccia Pipe**

Source: Report of Investigation No.18702, August 29, 2023, Plenge Laboratory

**Figure 12.2: Silver Leach Curves of WOCN for Los Cuyes West and Breccia Pipe**

Source: Report of Investigation No.18702, August 29, 2023, Plenge Laboratory

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 63

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;12.2.4 Bulk Flotation

Under grind size of P80=75µm, for all bulk flotation tests were carried out. The results are listed in Table 12.5. High gold and silver recoveries are achieved indicating the ores are amenable to a flotation process.

**Table 12.5: Bulk Flotation Results for Los Cuyes West and Breccia Pipe**

---

| | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | | **Los Cuyes West** | **Los Cuyes West** | |
| <br>&nbsp;&nbsp;**Parameter** | <br>&nbsp;&nbsp;**Unit** | **Low Grade** | **High Grade** | <br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Breccia Pipe** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Concentrate Mass Pull | &nbsp;&nbsp;% | 9.8 | 15.1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;11.3 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Ag g/t | 118.5 | 248 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;102 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Au g/t | 8.1 | 26.9 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;9.4 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Concentrate Grade | &nbsp;&nbsp;Cu % | 0.13 | 0.31 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.24 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Pb % | 0.52 | 1.32 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.15 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Zn % | 2.73 | 3.94 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;3.12 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;S total % | 26 | 29.7 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;26 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Ag % | 83.9 | 86.8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;95 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Au % | 93.4 | 95.9 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;97.8 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Recovery | &nbsp;&nbsp;Cu % | 70.9 | 86 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;91.1 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Pb % | 85 | 92.5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;65.6 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Zn % | 64.1 | 63.1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;78.5 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;S total % | 83.3 | 83 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;96.2 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Ag g/t | 2.5 | 6.7 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.7 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Au g/t | 0.06 | 0.20 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.03 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Tails Grade | &nbsp;&nbsp;Cu % | 0.01 | 0.01 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.00 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Pb % | 0.01 | 0.02 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.01 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Zn % | 0.17 | 0.41 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.11 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;S total % | 0.57 | 1.08 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.13 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Ag g/t | 13.9 | 43 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;12.2 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Au g/t | 0.85 | 4.22 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1.09 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Head Grade (Calculated) | &nbsp;&nbsp;Cu % | 0.02 | 0.05 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.03 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Pb % | 0.06 | 0.21 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.03 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Zn % | 0.42 | 0.94 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.45 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;S total % | 3.07 | 5.39 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;3.05 |

---

Source: Report of Investigation No.18702, August 29, 2023, Plenge Laboratory

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;12.2.5 Concentrate Cyanidation

CIL cyanide leach tests under intensive (10 g/L NaCN cyanide concentration) and standard (2.0 g/L NaCN cyanide concentration) conditions were carried out. The results are listed in Table 12.6 for intensive leach and in Table 12.7 for standard cyanide leach, respectively.

The results indicated both intensive and standard cyanidation can achieve a high gold extraction rate, and the sodium cyanide consumption was greatly reduced under mild conditions.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 64

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

The overall recoveries of bulk flotation and CIL of concentrate are shown in Table 12.8. The average recovery of the three samples is 37.3% for silver and 89.7% for gold.

**Table 12.6: Intensive CIL Cyanide Leach of Flotation Concentrate for Los Cuyes West and Breccia Pipe**

---

| | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
|  |  |  |  | **Recovery, %** | **Recovery, %** | **Recovery, %** |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Time<br> hour** | **Los Cuyes West Low Grade** | **Los Cuyes West Low Grade** | **Los Cuyes West Low Grade** | **Los Cuyes West High Grade** | **Los Cuyes West High Grade** | **Los Cuyes West High Grade** | **Breccia Pipe** | **Breccia Pipe** | **Breccia Pipe** |
|  | **Ag** |  | **Au** | **Ag** | **Ag** | **Au** | **Ag** |  | **Au** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2 | 47.2 |  | 85.2 | 41.8 |  | 91.7 | 43.8 |  | 91.9 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;4 | 51.1 |  | 89.9 | 44.9 |  | 94.3 | 45.3 |  | 92.6 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;8 | 57.1 |  | 93 | 48.6 |  | 95.9 | 48.7 |  | 92.4 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**24** | **63.5** |  | **94.7** | **52.8** |  | **96.3** | **52.2** |  | **91.8** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Head Grade, g/t | 104.8 |  | 8.36 | 256.1 |  | 28.67 | 105.8 |  | 9.95 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Residue Grade, g/t | 38.3 |  | 0.44 | 121 |  | 1.07 | 50.6 |  | 0.81 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;NaCN Consumption, kg/t |  | 9.46 |  |  | 14.90 |  |  | 16.45 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Lime Consumption, kg/t |  | 1.00 |  |  | 1.40 |  |  | 1.70 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;NaCN Add, kg/t |  | 44.59 |  |  | 46.69 |  |  | 48.52 |  |

---

Source: Report of Investigation No.18702, August 29, 2023, Plenge Laboratory

**Table 12.7: Standard CIL Cyanide Leach of Flotation Concentrate for Los Cuyes West and Breccia Pipe**

---

| | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
|  |  |  |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Recovery, %** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Recovery, %** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Recovery, %** |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Time<br> hour** | **Los Cuyes West Low Grade** | **Los Cuyes West Low Grade** | **Los Cuyes West Low Grade** | **Los Cuyes West High Grade** | **Los Cuyes West High Grade** | **Los Cuyes West High Grade** | **Breccia Pipe** | **Breccia Pipe** | **Breccia Pipe** |
|  | **Ag** |  | **Au** | **Ag** |  | **Au** | **Ag** |  | **Au** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;1 | 19.9 |  | 51.9 | 28.3 |  | 79.8 | 29.3 |  | 53.8 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2 | 26.2 |  | 83.3 | 32.3 |  | 93.5 | 33.9 |  | 68.4 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;4 | 31.3 |  | 85.2 | 35.9 |  | 95.6 | 37.7 |  | 82.8 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;8 | 35.5 |  | 89.1 | 39.0 |  | 96.2 | 39.6 |  | 87.8 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**24** | **41.8** |  | **93.1** | **42.5** |  | **96.8** | **41.9** |  | **91.1** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Head Grade, g/t | 118.5 |  | 8.08 | 247.6 |  | 26.88 | 102.3 |  | 9.40 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Residue Grade, g/t | 69.0 |  | 0.56 | 142.0 |  | 0.86 | 59.4 |  | 0.83 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;NaCN Consumption, kg/t |  | 3.10 |  |  | 5.47 |  |  | 5.61 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Lime Consumption, kg/t |  | 1.80 |  |  | 1.70 |  |  | 1.70 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;NaCN Add, kg/t |  | 9.24 |  |  | 9.72 |  |  | 9.69 |  |

---

Source: Report of Investigation No.18702, August 29, 2023, Plenge Laboratory

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 65

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Table 12.8: Overall Recovery of Bulk Flotation and Concentrate Cyanidation for Los Cuyes West and Breccia Pipe**

---

| | | | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
|  | **Bulk Concentrate** | **Bulk Concentrate** | **Bulk Concentrate** |  |  | **Recovery, %** | **Recovery, %** |  |  | **Reagent** | **Reagent** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Composites** | **Wt.** | **Ag** | **Au** | **Flotation** | **Flotation** | **Cyanidation** | **Cyanidation** | **Overall** | **Overall** | **Consumption** | **Consumption** |
|  | **%** | **g/t** | **g/t** |  |  |  |  |  |  | **kg/t** | **kg/t** |
|  |  |  |  | **Ag** | **Au** | **Ag** | **Au** | **Ag** | **Au** | **NaCN** | **CaO** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;LC West Low Grade | 9.8 | 118.5 | 8.1 | 83.9 | 93.4 | 41.8 | 93.1 | 35.1 | 87.0 | 0.31 | 0.2 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;LC West High Grade | 15.1 | 247.6 | 26.9 | 86.8 | 95.9 | 42.5 | 96.8 | 36.9 | 92.9 | 0.82 | 0.3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Breccia Pipe | 11.3 | 102.3 | 9.4 | 95.0 | 97.8 | 41.9 | 91.1 | 39.8 | 89.1 | 0.63 | 0.2 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Average |  |  |  | 88.5 | 95.7 | 42.1 | 93.7 | 37.3 | 89.7 | 0.59 | 0.2 |

---

Source: Report of Investigation No.18702, August 29, 2023, Plenge Laboratory

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;12.2.6 Flotation of Cyanide Leached Bulk Concentrate for Recovery of Silver, Lead and Zinc

The flow diagram is shown in Figure 12.3. The bulk flotation was performed at grind size of P80=75µm. Intensive cyanidation was applied to the bulk concentrate. Sequential selective flotation of the cyanide leach residues was tested to obtain a lead-silver concentrate and a zinc concentrate. The results are summarized in Table 12.9.

The results show that the average recovery of the three samples by cyanidation denoted as bullion in the table was 49.0% for silver and 90.2% for gold, respectively.

The lead concentrate assayed 1,873 g/t silver and 20.45% lead at recoveries of 10.8% and 32.2% respectively which were calculated with respect to the original feed. The zinc content in lead concentrate was high at 13.1%, suggesting if the regrinding is applied to the bulk concentrate, both the lead grade of lead concentrate and the zinc recovery of zinc concentrate may be increased. The separation between lead and zinc in the lead flotation circuit can also be improved by applying appropriate depressants and collectors.

The average zinc concentrate contained 121 g/t silver and 47.4% zinc at recoveries of 2.53% for silver and 36.1% for zinc respectively. The mass pull for the lead and zinc concentrates were 0.13% and 0.45%, respectively. Gold assays are not available for the concentrates because of insufficient weight. The overall silver recovery was 62.4%.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 66

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Figure 12.3: Flow Diagram for the Bulk Flotation-Cyanidation-Pb Flotation-Zn Flotation**

Source: Report of Investigation No.18702, August 29, 2023, Plenge Laboratory

**Table 12.9: Results of Bulk Flotation-Cyanidation-Pb Flotation-Zn Flotation**

---

| | | | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| <br>**Products** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Weight%** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <br> **Ag**<br> **g/t** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <br> **Au** **<br> g/t** | **Assay** **<br> Cu%** | <br> **Pb%** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <br> **Zn%** | <br> **Ag** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <br> **Au** | **Recovery %**<br> **Cu** | <br> **Pb** | <br> **Zn** |
| |  |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Los Cuyes West (Low Grade)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Los Cuyes West (Low Grade)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Los Cuyes West (Low Grade)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Los Cuyes West (Low Grade)** |  |  |  |  |  |
| Bulk Conc | &nbsp;&nbsp;10.2 | 104.8 | 8.40 | 0.13 | 0.39 | 2.57 | 85.7 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;95.2 | 75.3 | 81.6 | 58.5 |
| Bullion<sup>1</sup> | &nbsp;&nbsp;- |  |  |  |  |  | 54.4 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;90.2 |  |  |  |
| Ag/Pb Conc | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.08 | 1748 |  | 1.53 | **23.19** | 10.69 | 10.3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;- | 5.9 | **38.8** | 2.1 |
| Zn Conc | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.31 | 127.8 |  | 0.95 | 0.90 | **49.00** | 2.9 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;- | 14.2 | 5.8 | **36.7** |
| Overall Recovery |  |  |  |  |  |  | **64.7** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**90.2** | 5.9 | 38.8 | 36.7 |
|  |  |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Los Cuyes West (High Grade)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Los Cuyes West (High Grade)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Los Cuyes West (High Grade)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Los Cuyes West (High Grade)** |  |  |  |  |  |
| Bulk Conc | &nbsp;&nbsp;13.9 | 256.1 | 28.67 | 0.30 | 1.25 | 4.77 | 87.4 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;95 | 84.6 | 83.9 | 71.9 |
| Bullion<sup>1</sup> | &nbsp;&nbsp;- |  |  |  |  |  | 46.1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;91.5 |  |  |  |
| Ag/Pb Conc | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.21 | 2653 |  | 0.49 | **32.33** | 9.66 | 12.7 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;- | 1.9 | **38.6** | 2.2 |
| Zn Conc | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.67 | 161.3 |  | 1.24 | 0.94 | **45.18** | 2.5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;- | 15.1 | 3.6 | **32.6** |
| Overall Recovery |  |  |  |  |  |  | **58.8** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**91.5** | 1.9 | 38.6 | 32.6 |
|  |  |  |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Breccia Pipe** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Breccia Pipe** |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| Bulk Conc | &nbsp;&nbsp;10.5 | 105.8 | 9.95 | 0.29 | 0.21 | 3.35 | 89.3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;96.8 | 68.2 | 67.2 | 73.5 |
| Bullion<sup>1</sup> | &nbsp;&nbsp;- |  |  |  |  |  | 46.6 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;88.9 |  |  |  |
| Ag/Pb Conc | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.09 | 1216 |  | 6.41 | **5.84** | 22.78 | 9.4 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;- | 16.1 | **19.1** | 4.7 |
| Zn Conc | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.37 | 73 |  | 0.94 | 0.17 | **48.00** | 2.2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;- | 9.3 | 2.2 | **39.1** |
| Overall Recovery |  |  |  |  |  |  | **56.0** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**88.9** | 16.1 | 19.1 | 39.1 |
|  |  |  | **Average of the above 3 samples** | **Average of the above 3 samples** | **Average of the above 3 samples** | **Average of the above 3 samples** |  |  |  |  |  |
| Bulk Conc | &nbsp;&nbsp;11.5 | 165.9 | 17.01 | 0.25 | 0.68 | 3.69 | 87.5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;95.7 | 76 | 77.6 | 68 |
| Bullion1 |  |  |  |  |  |  | 49 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;90.2 |  |  |  |
| Ag/Pb Conc | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.13 | **1873** |  | 2.81 | **20.45** | 14.38 | **10.8** |  | 8 | **32.2** | 3 |
| Zn Conc | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.45 | **120.7** |  | 1.04 | 0.67 | **47.39** | 2.53 |  | 12.9 | 3.9 | **36.1** |
| Overall Recovery |  |  |  |  |  |  | **59.8** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**90.2** | 8 | 32.2 | 36.1 |
| Note: <sup>1</sup>Cyanide leach recovery against mill feed | Note: <sup>1</sup>Cyanide leach recovery against mill feed | Note: <sup>1</sup>Cyanide leach recovery against mill feed |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |

---

Source: Report of Investigation No.18702, August 29, 2023, Plenge Laboratory

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 67

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;12.2.7 Flotation of Whole Ore Cyanidation Residue

An exploratory batch flotation test on the MC cyanidation residue after detox was conducted and the result is listed in Table 12.10.

The metallurgical balance shows that it was feasible to obtain a bulk lead-copper concentrate assaying 650 g/t silver, 3.81 g/t gold, 5.88% copper and 16.2% lead with recoveries of 18.6% silver, 0.78% gold, 34.9% copper and 61.9% lead. The concentrate mass pull was 0. 1%.

Table 12.10: Results of Whole Ore Cyanidation and Bulk Flotation of Cyanide Leached Residue of Los Cuyes Master Composite

---

| | | | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | | | **G** **rade (%)** | **G** **rade (%)** | **G** **rade (%)** | **G** **rade (%)** | **Distr** **ibution (%)** | **Distr** **ibution (%)** | **Distr** **ibution (%)** | **Distr** **ibution (%)** | **Distr** **ibution (%)** |
| <br>&nbsp;&nbsp;**Product** | **Wt**<br>**(%)** | <br>**Au** | **Ag** | **Cu** | **Pb** | **Zn** | **Au** | **Ag** | **Cu** | **Pb** | **Zn** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Bullion |  |  |  |  |  |  | 87.1 | 49.4 |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Concentrate | 0.1 | 3.81 | 650 | 5.88 | 16.2 | 0.49 | 0.78 | 18.6 | 34.9 | 61.9 | 0.6 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;3rd Clnr tail | 1.5 | 0.1 | 11.8 | 0.31 | 0.2 | 0.18 | 0.21 | 3.6 | 19.5 | 8.9 | 2.2 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2nd Clnr tail | 4.1 | 0.04 | 1.2 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.16 | 0.26 | 1 | 5.3 | 3.4 | 5.4 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;1st Clnr tail | 23.2 | 0.06 | 1.2 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.17 | 2.08 | 5.7 | 10 | 6.4 | 32.8 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Tail | 71.1 | 0.09 | 1.5 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.10 | 9.58 | 21.7 | 30.4 | 19.5 | 59 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Head Calc | 100 | 0.09 | 2.4 | 0.02 | 0.04 | 0.12 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Head Assay |  | 0.10 | 2.7 |  | 0.03 | 0.13 |  |  |  |  |  |

---

Source: Report of Investigation No.18525-73-89, Progress Report, May 26, 2021

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;12.3 Camp

Three composite samples of the Camp deposit referred as Low Grade, High Grade and Med Grade composites were tested by Plenge Laboratory in 2020. The tests and results are summarized below.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;12.3.1 Head Assay and Mineral Composition

A representative split from each of the three samples and a Master Composite (MC), which was formed by taking equal parts from three samples, was assayed as shown in Table 12.11. The mineral composition is listed in Table 12.12. Like the Los Cuyes West deposit, the mineralized material from the Camp deposit is a sulfide ore suggesting bulk flotation is a suitable process to concentrate gold, silver and base metal minerals.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 68

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Table 12.11: Head Assay Results of the Samples from the Camp Deposit**

---

| | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Element** | **Unit** | **Assays** | **Assays** | **Assays** | **Assays** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Element** | **Unit** | **LOW Grade** | **MED Grade** | **HIGH Grade** | **Master Composite** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Ag | g/t | 14.0 | 10.5 | 60.3 | 29.3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Au1 | g/t | 1.73 | 5.05 | 6.07 | 4.75 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Au2 | g/t | 1.70 | 5.60 | 6.67 | 3.80 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Au average | g/t | 1.72 | 5.33 | 6.37 | 4.28 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Cu | % | 0.024 | 0.029 | 0.072 | 0.039 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Pb | % | 0.07 | 0.03 | 0.39 | 0.18 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Zn | % | 0.70 | 0.71 | 1.54 | 0.98 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Fe | % | 4.44 | 4.19 | 5.82 | 5.37 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;As | g/t | 129 | 178 | 272 | NA |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;S total | % | 3.52 | 2.48 | 7.04 | 4.20 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;S sulfide | % | 3.11 | 2.02 | 6.33 | 3.60 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;C total | % | 0.83 | 0.84 | 0.41 | 0.70 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;C organic | % | 0.10 | 0.10 | 0.08 | 0.10 |

---

Source: Report of Investigation No.18525 (Base Camp Samples Progress Report), July 24, 2020, Plenge Laboratory

**Table 12.12: Bulk Mineralogy by XRD for the Samples from the Camp Deposit**

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Mineral** | **Distribution, %** | **Distribution, %** | **Distribution, %** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Mineral** | **LOW Grade** | **MED Grade** | **HIGH Grade** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Quartz | 40.2 | 29.4 | 39.5 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Muscovite | 23.9 | 11.3 | 16.5 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Orthoclase | 6.2 | 12.1 | 5.8 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Butlerite | 6.1 | 2.7 | 4.5 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Albite | 1.3 | 15.7 | 3.2 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Microcline |  |  | 5.3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Pyrite | 4.3 | 3.1 | 8.9 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Anorthite |  | 3.5 | 3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Labradorite |  |  | 1 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Chamosite | 1.3 | 6 | 1 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Actinolite | 1 | 1 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Sphalerite | 1.1 | 1.1 | 2.4 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Rhodonite | 1.4 |  | 1.2 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Phlogopite | 3 | 1.2 | 1 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Clinochlore | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Calcite | 2.3 | 3.2 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Andesine | 1 | 1 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Kaolinite |  | 1.7 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;N.D. | 6 | 5.9 | 5.8 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Total | 100 | 100 | 100 |

---

Source: Report of Investigation No.18525 (Base Camp Samples Progress Report), July 24, 2020, Plenge Laboratory

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 69

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;12.3.2 Gravity Concentration

Under the grind size of P80=210µm, a gravity concentration test by using a centrifugal concentrator and cyanidation tests on the gravity tails by WOCN and CIL in different grind sizes were carried out. The gravity concentration test results are listed in Table 12.13. The gravity concentration achieved a high- grade concentrate at a mass yield of 0.28%. The gold recovery was 35.2% at a concentrate grade of 600g/t. The result suggests that gravity concentration is applicable for the mineralized materials from the Camp deposit.

**Table 12.13: Gravity Concentration Result for the Master Composite of the Camp Deposit**

---

| | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Product** | **Wt., %** | | **Distribution, %** | **Distribution, %** | **Distribution, %** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Product** | **Wt., %** | **Assays, g/t**<br>**Ag** | **Au** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Ag** | **Au** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Gravity Concentrate | 0.28 | 1377 | 600 | &nbsp;&nbsp;11.9 | 35.2 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Gravity Tail | 99.7 | 28.3 | 3.06 | &nbsp;&nbsp;88.1 | 64.8 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Head Calculated | 100.0 | 32.0 | 4.71 | &nbsp;&nbsp;100.0 | 100.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Head Assay |  | 29.3 | 4.48 |  |  |

---

Source: 1 Report of Investigation No.18525 (Base Camp Samples Progress Report), July 24, 2020, Plenge Laboratory

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;12.3.3 Cyanidation

Cyanide leach tests were conducted on the gravity concentrate. CIL cyanide leach tests were also conducted on the MC sample. The results are summarized in Table 12.14.

The grind size had a noticeable effect on the gold recovery for the gravity tails when the grind size was coarser than P80 75µm. There was no preg-robbing effect observed.

At grind size of P80=75µm, the gold leach extraction rate was high indicating the mineralized material from the Camp deposit was amenable to cyanidation.

WOCN result of the gravity concentrate achieved a high gold recovery, but the residue grade was still too high, and the silver recovery was low.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 70

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Table 12.14: Results of Gravity Tails Cyanidation for the Camp Deposit**

---

| | | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Feed**<br> **Material** | **Cyanidation <br> Method** **<sup>1</sup>** | | **Head Assay g/t** | **Head Assay g/t** | **Residue Assay g/t** | **Residue Assay g/t** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Extraction %** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Extraction %** | **Consumption kg/t** | **Consumption kg/t** |
| **Feed**<br> **Material** | **Cyanidation <br> Method** **<sup>1</sup>** | **Grind Size**<br>**P80** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Ag** | **Au** | **Ag** | **Au** | **Ag** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Au** | **NaCN** | **Lime** |
|  | WOC | 210 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;27 | 2.9 | 17.4 | 0.341 | 35.6 | &nbsp;&nbsp;88.2 | 0.7 | 0.4 |
|  | WOC | 75 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;22.6 | 2.51 | 13.9 | 0.118 | 38.3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;95.3 | 0.9 | 0.8 |
| Gravity Tails | CIL | 210 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;21.7 | 2.93 | 15.4 | 0.322 | 29.1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;89 | 0.8 | 0.4 |
|  | CIL | 150 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;25.3 | 3.06 | 16.1 | 0.225 | 36.3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;92.6 | 0.6 | 2.1 |
|  | CIL | 75 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;25.3 | 2.59 | 17.9 | 0.127 | 29.2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;95.1 | 1 | 0.4 |
| Gravity Conc. | WOC | 210 | 1299 | 571 | 525.7 | 1.646 | 59.5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;99.7 | 16.9 | 0.8 |
|  | CIL | 75 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;31.6 | 4.48 | 17.8 | 0.126 | 43.5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;97.2 | 1.3 | 0.4 |
| Feed | CIL | 53 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;31.1 | 4.31 | 17.4 | 0.092 | 44 | &nbsp;&nbsp;97.9 | 1.1 | 0.9 |
|  | CIL | 38 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;31.4 | 4.36 | 16.6 | 0.112 | 47.1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;97.4 | 1.1 | 0.9 |

---

Note:<sup>1</sup> Standard cyanidation: NaCN concentration=0.1%, pulp density=40%, leach time=24 hours, pH=11

Source: Report of Investigation No.18525 (Base Camp Samples Progress Report), July 24, 2020, Plenge Laboratory

The whole ore direct cyanidation (WOCN) tests were conducted on three Camp samples in 2021. Under the grind size of P80=75µm and 24 hours of cyanide leach time, the WOCN and CIL cyanide leach results are listed in Table 12.15.

Table 12.15: Test Results of the Whole Ore Cyanide Leach (WOCN) and CIL Cyanide Leach for the Camp Composite samples

---

| | | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Cyanidation<br> Method** | **Cyanidation<br> Method** | **Sample** | **Head Grade (g/t)** | **Head Grade (g/t)** | **Residue Grade (g/)** | **Residue Grade (g/)** | | **Reagent**<br> **Consumption (kg/t)** | **Reagent**<br> **Consumption (kg/t)** | **Reagent**<br> **Consumption (kg/t)** |
| **Cyanidation<br> Method** | **Cyanidation<br> Method** | **Sample** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Au** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Ag** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Au** | **Ag** | **Extraction (%)**<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Au** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Ag** | **NaCN** | **CaO** |
|  | Low Grade | Low Grade | &nbsp;&nbsp;1.70 | &nbsp;&nbsp;19.9 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.14 | 10.1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;91.8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;49.5 | 0.80 | 0.7 |
| WOCN | Med Grade | Med Grade | &nbsp;&nbsp;4.69 | &nbsp;&nbsp;12.6 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.16 | 7.1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;96.5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;43.3 | 0.70 | 0.7 |
|  | High Grade | High Grade | &nbsp;&nbsp;7.54 | &nbsp;&nbsp;64.9 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.30 | 36.7 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;96 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;43.3 | 1.08 | 0.7 |
|  | Low Grade | Low Grade | &nbsp;&nbsp;1.77 | &nbsp;&nbsp;21.9 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.14 | 12.8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;92.1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;41.5 | 0.98 | 0.7 |
| CIL | Med Grade | Med Grade | &nbsp;&nbsp;4.18 | &nbsp;&nbsp;11.8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.08 | 7.1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;98 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;39.7 | 0.79 | 0.7 |
|  | High Grade | High Grade | &nbsp;&nbsp;8.14 | &nbsp;&nbsp;60.6 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.25 | 31.2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;97 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;48.5 | 1.07 | 0.7 |

---

Source: Metallurgical Investigation No 18525-73-89 Progress Report, May 26, 2021, Plenge Laboratory

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 71

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;12.3.4 Bulk Flotation

Bulk flotation tests on the gravity tails and the feed sample under different grind sizes were carried out. The bulk flotation is an "all sulfides flotation" aiming to float all sulfide minerals and precious metals to obtain a mixed concentrate. The results are summarized in Table 12.16. The bulk flotation achieved good results at all the grind sizes with the concentrate mass pull from 15.5% to 17.7% for gravity tails and 14.4% for the feed sample.

A set of tests for the Design of Experiment (DOE) were conducted to explore the gravity concentration, flotation feed grind size and flotation pulp density (% solid). The results are summarized in Table 12.17. High recoveries were achieved under all the tested grind sizes, but the concentrate recovery/mass pull was somewhat inverse to the grind size. Gravity concentration had a minor contribution to the overall recovery.

Table 12.16: Bulk Flotation of the Gravity Tails and the Feed Sample for the Camp Deposit

---

| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Feed**<br> **Material** | **Grind** **<br> Size<br> P80µm** | **Conce** **ntrate** | **Conce** **ntrate** | **Conce** **ntrate** | **Conce** **ntrate** | **Conce** **ntrate** | **Conce** **ntrate** | **Recovery, %** | **Recovery, %** | **Recovery, %** | **Recovery, %** | **Recovery, %** |
| **Feed**<br> **Material** | **Grind** **<br> Size<br> P80µm** | **Wt.%** | **Ag** <br> **g/t** | **Au** <br> **g/t** | **Pb** **<br> %** | **Zn** **<br> %** | **Stotal** **<br> %** | **Ag** | **Au** | **Pb** | **Zn** | **Stotal** |
| Gravity Tails | 150 | 16 | 178 | 18.1 | 0.6 | 5.4 | 21.8 | 96.3 | 96.9 | 92.5 | 83.9 | 97.2 |
| Gravity Tails | 106 | 15.5 | 164 | 19.3 | 0.6 | 5.3 | 22.5 | 96.3 | 98.3 | 92.2 | 83 | 96.9 |
| Gravity Tails | 75 | 17.7 | 143 | 16.5 | 0.6 | 4.7 | 19.7 | 96.4 | 98.1 | 92.4 | 88.5 | 97.7 |
| Feed Sample | 150 | 14.4 | 187 | 32.1 | 1 | 5.6 | 25.9 | 96.3 | 98.5 | 94.5 | 78.8 | 96.8 |

---

Source: Report of Investigation No.18525 (Base Camp Samples Progress Report), July 24, 2020, Plenge Laboratory

**Table 12.17: Bulk Flotation of the Design of Experiment for the Camp Deposit**

---

| | | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Factor** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Factor** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Factor** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Factor** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Factor** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Response** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Response** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Response** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Response** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Response** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Response** |
| **Run** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Feed Size**<br> **P80 µm** | **% Solids** | **Gravity** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Tail** <br> **Au g/t** | **Flo** **tation Recovery %** | **Flo** **tation Recovery %** | **Flo** **tation Recovery %** | **Flo** **tation Recovery %** | **Wt. %** | **Viscosity**<br> **cp** |
| **Run** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Feed Size**<br> **P80 µm** | **% Solids** | **Gravity** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Tail** <br> **Au g/t** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Au** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Ag** | **Pb** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Zn** | **Wt. %** | **Viscosity**<br> **cp** |
| 1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;150 | 32.4 | Yes | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.087 | 98.0 | 98.9 | 91.8 | 90.0 | 14.9 | 1.6 |
| 2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;139 | 35.3 | Yes | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.083 | 98.1 | 98.8 | 92.1 | 95.1 | 16.0 | 1.8 |
| 3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;150 | 38.3 | No | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.096 | 97.8 | 98.8 | 93.8 | 90.5 | 18.4 | 2.1 |
| 4 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;150 | 32.9 | Yes | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.081 | 98.2 | 98.8 | 92.2 | 94.5 | 16.4 | 1.6 |
| 5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;99 | 37.5 | Yes | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.045 | 99.0 | 98.8 | 92.5 | 97.7 | 23.2 | 2.4 |
| 6 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;74 | 38.3 | No | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.047 | 98.9 | 98.9 | 94.5 | 98.5 | 24.1 | 2.8 |
| 7 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;150 | 30.3 | No | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.081 | 98.2 | 98.8 | 93.9 | 88.6 | 16.3 | 1.5 |
| 8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;74 | 30.6 | No | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.040 | 99.1 | 98.8 | 94.0 | 98.4 | 18.0 | 2.0 |
| 9 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;112 | 35.9 | No | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.085 | 98.1 | 99.0 | 94.4 | 97.7 | 21.4 | 1.9 |
| 10 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;74 | 34.2 | Yes | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.055 | 98.8 | 98.9 | 92.4 | 96.1 | 18.3 | 2.0 |

---

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 72

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

---

| | | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Factor** | **Factor** | **Factor** | | **Response** | **Response** | **Response** | **Response** | **Response** | |
| | **Feed Size** |  |  | | **Flotation Recovery %** | **Flotation Recovery %** | **Flotation Recovery %** | **Flotation Recovery %** |  | |
| <br>**Run** | **P** **80 µm** | **% Solids** | **Gravity** | <br>**Tail**<br>**Au g/t** | **Au** | **Ag** | **Pb** | **Zn** | **Wt. %** | <br>**Viscosity**<br>**cp** |
| 11 | 112 | 31.8 | No | 0.055 | 98.8 | 98.9 | 94.1 | 98.3 | 18.2 | 1.7 |
| 12 | 74 | 30.2 | Yes | 0.035 | 99.2 | 98.8 | 92.1 | 96.9 | 19.2 | 1.9 |
| 13 | 99 | 37.4 | Yes | 0.058 | 98.7 | 99.0 | 92.7 | 96.2 | 21.6 | 2.4 |
| 14 | 116 | 31.0 | Yes | 0.071 | 98.4 | 98.9 | 92.1 | 94.4 | 16.5 | 1.6 |
| 15 | 150 | 38.2 | No | 0.122 | 97.3 | 98.9 | 94.3 | 89.7 | 17.4 | 2.1 |
| 16 | 150 | 30.1 | No | 0.083 | 98.1 | 98.8 | 93.8 | 97.6 | 16.1 | 1.5 |
| 17 | 74 | 30.4 | No | 0.046 | 99.0 | 98.9 | 93.6 | 98.4 | 20.1 | 1.9 |

---

Source: Report of Investigation No.18525 (Base Camp Samples Progress Report), July 24, 2020, Plenge Laboratory

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;12.3.5 Concentrate Cyanidation

The bulk flotation recovered a mixed concentrates with all the sulfide minerals and precious metals. The results of cyanide leach of these bulk concentrates are summarized in Table 12.18. The bulk concentrates came from different flotation tests without regrinding.

The gold recovery was satisfactory at grind size less than P80=125µm, except silver. The remaining silver and gold will be recovered into the lead concentrate and zinc concentrate during the subsequential lead and zinc sequential selective flotation. Generally, the finer the grind size, the higher the gold recovery. More testing should be carried out to determine the optimal grind size considering sequential selective lead and zinc flotation.

**Table 12.18: Cyanidation of the Bulk Flotation Concentrate for the Base Camp**

---

| | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Head Assay g/t** | **Head Assay g/t** | **Residue Assay g/t** | **Residue Assay g/t** | **Extraction %** | **Extraction %** | **Consumption kg/t** | **Consumption kg/t** |
| **Grind Size**<br>**P** **80 µm** | **Ag** | **Au** | **Ag** | **Au** | **Ag** | **Au** | **NaCN** | **Lime** |
| 180 | 144 | 16.5 | 68.3 | 1.22 | 52.5 | 92.6 | 4.64 | 0.6 |
| 150 | 149 | 17.2 | 70 | 1.07 | 53 | 93.8 | 4.31 | 0.8 |
| 125 | 148 | 16.4 | 68.7 | 0.82 | 53.5 | 95 | 4.72 | 0.5 |
| 106 | 147 | 16.3 | 73.7 | 0.86 | 49.8 | 94.7 | 4.48 | 0.6 |
| Average | 147 | 16.6 | 70.2 | 0.99 | 52.2 | 94 | 4.54 | 0.63 |

---

Source: Report of Investigation No.18525 (Base Camp Samples Progress Report), July 24, 2020, Plenge Laboratory

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;12.3.6 Lead and Zinc Flotation of the Cyanide Leached Bulk Concentrate

The preliminary lead and zinc sequential selective flotation tests were conducted for the cyanide leached bulk concentrate under different grind size and different reagent regimes. The flow diagram is shown as Figure 12.3 on a previous page. The results are summarized in Table 12.19. The results show that the saleable lead concentrate and zinc concentrate were likely produced. Detailed optimization tests are recommended.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 73

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Table 12.19: Lead and Zinc Flotation of the Cyanide Leached Bulk Concentrate for the Camp Deposit**

---

| | | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | | | | | | | **Distribution<sup>1</sup>%** | **Distribution<sup>1</sup>%** | **Distribution<sup>1</sup>%** | **Distribution<sup>1</sup>%** |
| **Grind Size**<br>**P** **80 µm** | <br>**Product** | **Wt.%** | **Ag**<br>**g/t** | **Assay**<br> **Au**<br>**g/t** | **Pb%** | **Zn%** | **Ag** | **Au** | **Pb** | **Zn** |
| 106 | Pb Conc. | 0.3 | 3324 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1.01 | 52.4 | 3.86 | 6.7 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.01 | &nbsp;&nbsp;24.8 | 0.2 |
| 106 | Zn Conc. | 1 | 317 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.83 | 4.28 | 2.32 | 2.4 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.05 | &nbsp;&nbsp;7.7 | 0.5 |
| 125 | Pb Conc. | 0.3 | 2472 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1.01 | 42.9 | 6.56 | 4.4 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.01 | &nbsp;&nbsp;18.6 | 0.3 |
| 125 | Zn Conc. | 3.2 | 417 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1.98 | 4.18 | 40.3 | 9 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.26 | &nbsp;&nbsp;21.7 | 24.1 |
| 150 | Pb Conc. | 0.3 | 2405 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1.17 | 39.1 | 23.7 | 4.6 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.01 | &nbsp;&nbsp;18.5 | 1.3 |
| 150 | Zn Conc. | 0.7 | 169 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.75 | 2.34 | 1.62 | 0.9 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.15 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3 | 0.2 |
| 180 | Pb Conc. | 0.3 | 1513 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.76 | 29.4 | 3.31 | 3.5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.01 | &nbsp;&nbsp;16.9 | 0.2 |
| 180 | Zn Conc. | 5.4 | 268 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;3.19 | 2.32 | 47.8 | 9.9 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.63 | &nbsp;&nbsp;21.3 | 55.4 |

---

**Note: <sup>1</sup>Distribution based on Gravity Feed. Lead and zinc in gravity concentrate taken as negligible.**

Source: Report of Investigation No.18525 (Base Camp Samples Progress Report), July 24, 2020, Plenge Laboratory

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;12.3.7 Sequential Selective Flotation of the Whole Ore Cyanide Leach Residue

An exploratory flotation test on the MC cyanidation residue after detox was conducted and the result is listed in Table 12.20.

The metallurgical balance shows that it was feasible to produce a lead concentrate containing 3,348 g/t silver, 3.28 g/t gold and 44.2% lead with recoveries of 12.3% for silver, 0.08% for gold and 38.1% for lead. The concentrate mass pull was 0.1%.

A zinc concentrate was also produced, which contained 219 g/t silver, 2.5 g/t gold and 45.3 % zinc with recoveries of 8.7% for silver, 0.68% for gold and 59.7 for zinc. The concentrate mass pull was 1.3%. This flotation test was operated in an open circuit and the performance is expected to improve in a closed circuit.

Table 12.20: Results of the Whole Ore Cyanidation and Flotation of the Cyanide Leach Residue for the Camp Master Composite

---

| | | | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Product** | **Wt** **<br> (%)** | **Grade (%)** | **Grade (%)** | **Grade (%)** | **Grade (%)** | **Grade (%)** | **Distribution (%)** | **Distribution (%)** | **Distribution (%)** | **Distribution (%)** | **Distribution (%)** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Product** | **Wt** **<br> (%)** | **Au** | **Ag** | **Cu** | **Pb** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Zn** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Au** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Ag** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Cu** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Pb** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Zn** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Bullion |  |  |  |  |  |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;95.7 | &nbsp;&nbsp;44.6 |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Pb Concentrate | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.1 | **3.28** | **3348** | 0.80 | **44.2** | 20 | &nbsp;&nbsp;**0.08** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**12.3** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2.6 | &nbsp;&nbsp;**38.1** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2.4 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;3<sup>rd</sup> Cleaner tail Pb | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.4 | 1.94 | 1292 | 1.09 | 11 | 41.5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.15 | &nbsp;&nbsp;15.2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;11.2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;30.4 | &nbsp;&nbsp;16.2 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2<sup>nd</sup> Cleaner tail Pb | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.4 | 1.02 | 288 | 0.71 | 2.30 | 37.9 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.08 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;3.4 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.4 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;6.3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;15 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Zn Concentrate | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1.3 | **2.52** | **219** | 1.37 | 1.00 | **45.3** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**0.68** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**8.7** | &nbsp;&nbsp;47.7 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;9.3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;**59.7** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;3<sup>rd</sup> Cleaner tail Zn | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.5 | 0.53 | 48 | 0.08 | 0.39 | 1.07 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.05 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.7 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1.3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.5 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2<sup>nd</sup> Cleaner tail Zn | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2 | 0.46 | 32 | 0.04 | 0.21 | 0.47 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.18 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1.9 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2.1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2.9 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.9 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;1<sup>st</sup> Cleaner tail Zn | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;12.1 | 0.55 | 24 | 0.02 | 0.07 | 0.24 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1.35 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;8.8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;6.3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.9 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2.9 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Tail | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;83.2 | 0.10 | 1.8 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.03 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1.70 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;4.5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;21.7 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2.5 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Head Calc | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;100 | 0.21 | 18.6 | 0.04 | 0.14 | 1.01 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;100 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;100 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;100 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;100 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;100 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Head Assay |  | 0.201 | 18 | 0.04 | 0.18 | 0.98 |  |  |  |  |  |

---

Source: Report of Investigation No.18525-73-89, Progress Report, May 26, 2021

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 74

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;12.4 Soledad

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;12.4.1 Direct Cyanidation

San Jose is part of the Soledad deposit. A composite sample of San Jose was tested by direct cyanidation (WOCN) at two different grind sizes in 2004. A fine grind size and a long leaching time were applied to the WOCN tests. The results are shown in Table 12.21.

Gold extraction of 91.6% to 98.3% were achieved, indicating the WOCN process is suitable for the ore from San Jose deposit.

**Table 12.21: WOCN Test Results of San Jose Sample**

---

| | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | | **Head Grade** | **Head Grade** | **Residue Grade** | **Residue Grade** | **Extraction** | **Extraction** | **Reagent <br> Consumption** | **Reagent <br> Consumption** |
| | | **(g/t)** | **(g/t)** | **(g/)** | **(g/)** | **(%)** | **(%)** | **(kg/t)** | **(kg/t)** |
| <br>**Grind Size** | **Residence**<br>**Time**<br>**(h)** | **Au** | **Ag** | **Au** | **Ag** | **Au** | **Ag** | **NaCN** | **CaO** |
| P90=75µ | 72 | 2.27 | 26.72 | 0.19 | 4.81 | 91.6 | 82.0 | 2.04 | 3.44 |
| P100=75µ | 96 | 1.94 | 29.91 | 0.033 | 4.20 | 98.3 | 86.0 | 2.10 | 5.69 |

---

Source: Breccias -Sanjose-Ecuador Direct Cyaniding Metallurgical Testwork, May 2004

Another composite sample was tested using WOCN and CIL processes under grind size of P80=106µm. The gold extractions were low as shown in Table 12.22. Compared with the result above, the grind size may be the controlling factor of gold extraction.

**Table 12.22: Cyanidation Results of the San Jose Composite Sample**

---

| | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
|  | | **Head Grade** | **Head Grade** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Residue Grade** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Residue Grade** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Extraction** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Extraction** | **Reagent <br> Consumption** | **Reagent <br> Consumption** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Grind Size** | | **(g/t)** | **(g/t)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**(g/)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**(g/)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**(%)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**(%)** | **(kg/t)** | **(kg/t)** |
|  | <br>**Time**<br>**(h)** | **Au** | **Ag** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Au** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Ag** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Au** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Ag** | **NaCN** | **CaO** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;WOCN | 48 | 4.17 | 8.81 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1.14 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;72.6 | &nbsp;&nbsp;43.3 | 1.64 | 6.6 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;CIL | 48 | 3.97 | 6.70 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1.45 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;4.0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;63.4 | &nbsp;&nbsp;40.3 | 1.53 | 6.1 |

---

Source: San Jose Ore Evaluation Testwork, May 2006, Independent Metallurgical Laboratories Pty Ltd.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;12.4.2 Bulk Flotation Followed By Gravity Concentration And Cyanidation Process Options

A bulk flotation test was carried out at grind size of P80=500µm by using Potassium Amyl Xanthate (PAX) as the collector.

The flotation concentrate was leached by intensive cyanidation at the original grind size of P80=500µm and then the leach residue was reground to P80=106µm for the secondary step of intensive cyanidation. The flotation tail was subject to standard whole ore cyanidation after regrinding to P80=106µm.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 75

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

The test flowsheet is shown in Figure 12.4. The flotation result is presented in Table 12.23. The gold, silver and sulphide minerals were enriched in the concentrate, but the gold grade was low. The gold recovery was 72.8% leaving the tails grade high at 1.44g/t. The results are summarized in Table 12.24. The overall gold recovery was 80.7%.

**Figure 12.4: Flowsheet of Bulk Flotation at Coarse Grind Size and Cyanide leach of Bulk Concentrate**

Source: SRK based on the metallurgical test report

**Table 12.23: Bulk Flotation Test Result of a San Jose Composite Sample**

---

| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | | **Grade (g/t)** | **Grade (g/t)** | **Grade (%)** | **Grade (%)** | **Grade (%)** | **Distribution (%)** | **Distribution (%)** | **Distribution (%)** | **Distribution (%)** | **Distribution (%)** | **Distribution (%)** | **Distribution (%)** |
| <br>&nbsp;&nbsp;**Product** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Wt**<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**(%)** | **Au** | **Ag** | **Cu** | **Pb** | **Zn** | **S** | **Au** | **Ag** | **Cu** | **Pb** | **Zn** | **S** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Bulk Concentrate | 16.05 | 20.15 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;32 | 0.117 | 0.023 | 2.61 | 41.2 | 72.8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;67.1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;61.5 | 46.8 | 92.1 | 81.00 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Flot Tails | 83.95 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1.44 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;3 | 0.014 | 0.005 | 0.04 | 1.85 | 27.2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;32.9 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;38.5 | 53.2 | 7.9 | 19.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Calc Head | 100.0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;4.44 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;8 | 0.03 | 0.008 | 0.45 | 8.16 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Assay Head |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;4.36 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;9 | 0.02 | 0.009 | 0.53 | 8.11 |  |  |  |  |  |  |

---

Source: San Jose Ore Evaluation Testwork, May 2006, Independent Metallurgical Laboratories Pty Ltd.

**Table 12.24: Summary Results of Bulk Flotation and Cyanide Leach of the Bulk Concentrate**

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Flotation with Leaching of Float Conc with Subsequent <br> Regrinding and Leaching of Float Tail @ P80=106µm** | **Au Distribution<br> (%)** | **Au Extraction<br> (%)** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Float Conc Au Distribution | 72.8 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Float Conc Leach @ P<sub>80</sub>=500µm Au Extraction |  | 52.6 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Float Conc Releach @ P<sub>80</sub>=106µm Au Extraction |  | 10.3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Float Conc Releach Residue Au Distribution | 9.9 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Float Tails Au Distribution | 27.2 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Float Tail Leach @ P80=106µm Au Extraction |  | 17.8 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Float Tail Leach @ P80=106µm Au Distribution | 9.4 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Overall Au Recovery |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;80.7 |

---

Source: San Jose Ore Evaluation Testwork, May 2006, Independent Metallurgical Laboratories Pty Ltd.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 76

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

Because gold recovery from cyanide leach of the flotation tails was low, a gravity concentration test was conducted by using a Knelson centrifugal concentrator on the flotation tails after regrinding to P80=106µm.

Cyanidation tests on the gravity concentrate and the combined concentrate cyanide leach residue and gravity tails were conducted. The results are summarized in Table 12.25. The overall gold recovery raised to 88.2%.

**Table 12.25: Summary Results of Bulk Flotation, and Gravity Concentration and Cyanidation**

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Bulk Flotation Followed by Cyanide Leaching of Float Conc and <br> Subsequent Regrinding + Gravity Separation +Leaching of Float**<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;**Tail @ P80=106µm** | **Au <br> Distribution**<br>**(%)** | **Au <br> Extraction**<br>**(%)** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Float Conc Au Distribution | 72.8 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Float Conc Leach @ P<sub>80</sub>=500µm Au Extraction |  | 52.6 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Float Conc Releach @ P<sub>80</sub>=106µm Au Extraction |  | 10.3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Float Conc Releach Residue Au Distribution | 9.9 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Float Tails Au Distribution | 27.2 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Gravity Conc Intensive Leach Au Extraction |  | 16.6 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Au Extraction from Conc Leach Residue + Gravity Tail |  | 8.7 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Conc Leach Residue + Gravity Tail Releach Residue Au Distribution | 1.9 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Overall Au Recovery |  | 88.2 |

---

Source: San Jose Ore Evaluation Test work, May 2006, Independent Metallurgical Laboratories Pty Ltd.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;12.4.3 Multi-Stage Gravity Concentration Followed By Cyanidation Options

The gravity concentration test work completed on the San Jose composite sample involved an initial gravity (Knelson) concentration step at a grind size of 80% passing 500µm (P80=500µm) with the tails being subjected to further gravity concentrating after regrinding to P80=250µm and P80=106µm. Each gravity concentrate produced was intensively leached with cyanide with the final tails from each grind size given a standard cyanide leach. The test flowsheet is shown in Figure 12.5. Results are summarised in Table 12.26. The final results are presented in Table 12.27. The overall gold extraction was 92.1%.

**Table 12.26: Results of Multi-Stage Gravity Concentration and Cyanidation Tests**

---

| | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Operation** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Product** | | **Grade (g/t)** | **Grade (g/t)** | **Recovery (%)** | **Recovery (%)** |
|  |  | **Wt**<br>**(%)** | **Au** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Ag** | **Au** | **Ag** |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Concentrate | 1.8 | 61.2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;48.0 | 25.7 | 9.8 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Gravity Concentration@ P80=500µm | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Tails | 98.2 | 3.30 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;8.3 | 74.3 | 90.2 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Head | 100.0 | 4.36 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;9.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Intensive Leach of Gravity Conc | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;PLS |  |  |  | 90.0 | 65.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;@P80=500µm | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Residue |  | 6.15 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;17.0 | 10.0 | 35.0 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Calc Head |  | 61.2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;48.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Combined Residue & Gravity Tails | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;PLS |  |  |  | 61.0 | 41.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Leach @ P80=250µm | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Residue |  | 1.64 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.0 | 39.0 | 59.0 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Calc Head |  | 4.21 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;8.5 | 100.0 | 100.0 |

---

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 77

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

---

| | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Operation** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Product** | | **Grade (g/t)** | **Grade (g/t)** | **Recovery (%)** | **Recovery (%)** |
|  |  | **Wt**<br>**(%)** | **Au** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Ag** | **Au** | **Ag** |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Concentrate | 9.1 | 18.8 | 20.8 | 44.6 | 26.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Gravity Concentration @ P80=250µm | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Tails | 90.9 | 2.33 | 6.0 | 55.4 | 74.0 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Head | 100.0 | 3.82 | 7.34 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Intensive Leach of Gravity Conc | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;PLS |  |  |  | 86.1 | 52.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;@P80=250µm | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Residue |  | 2.61 | 10.0 | 13.9 | 48.0 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Calc Head |  | 18.8 | 20.8 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Combined Residue & Gravity Tails | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;PLS |  |  |  | 73.0 | 50.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Leach @ P80=106µm | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Residue |  | 0.63 | 3.0 | 27.0 | 50.0 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Calc Head |  | 2.33 | 6.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Gravity Concentration | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Concentrate | 8.9 | 21.6 | 29.0 | 61.7 | 36.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;@ P80=106µm | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Tails | 91.1 | 1.32 | 5.0 | 38.3 | 64.0 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Head | 100.0 | 3.14 | 7.2 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Intensive Leach of Gravity Conc | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;PLS |  |  |  | 87.1 | 42.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;@P80=106µm | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Residue |  | 2.78 | 17.0 | 12.9 | 58.0 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Calc Head |  | 21.6 | 29.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Leach of Final Gravity Tails | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;PLS |  |  |  | 77.9 | NA |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;@ P80=106µm | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Residue |  | 0.32 | <3 | 22.1 | NA |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Calc Head |  | 1.45 | NA | 100.0 | 100.0 |

---

Source: San Jose Ore Evaluation Testwork, May 2006, Independent Metallurgical Laboratories Pty Ltd.

**Figure 12.5: Multi-Stage Gravity Concentration and Cyanidation Test Flowsheet**

![](ex99-1_047.jpg)

Source: SRK based on the metallurgical test report

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 78

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Table 12.27: Overall Results of Multi-stage Gravity Concentration and Cyanidation**

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Multi-Stage Gravity Concentration and Cyanidation of Gravity**<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;**Products** | **Au Distribution**<br>**(%)** | **Au Extraction**<br>**(%)** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Primary Gravity Conc @ P80=500µm Au Recovery | 25.7 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Primary Gravity Conc @ P80=500µm Au Extraction |  | 23.1 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Primary Gravity Conc Leach Residue Au Distribution | 2.6 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Primary Gravity Tail @ P80=500µm Au Distribution | 74.3 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Primary Gravity Tail plus Conc Leach Residue Au Distribution | 76.9 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Secondary Gravity Conc @ P80=106µm Au Recovery | 47.4 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Secondary Gravity Conc Intensive Leach Au Extraction |  | 41.3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Secondary Gravity Tail plus Conc Leach Au Distribution | 35.6 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Secondary Gravity Tail plus Conc Leach Au Extraction |  | 27.7 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Secondary Gravity Tail plus Conc Leach Residue Au Distribution | 7.9 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Overall Au Recovery** |  | **92.1** |

---

Source: San Jose Ore Evaluation Testwork, May 2006, Independent Metallurgical Laboratories Pty Ltd.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;12.5 Enma

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;12.5.1 Sample
 and Head Assay

The test sample was a composite of the core intervals of the drill hole ENMT21-01 from the Enma deposit. The head assay results are shown in Table 12.28. The average gold grade was 0.90 g/t, and the content of copper, lead, and zinc were low, while the sulphur content was high indicating high pyrite content.

**Table 12.28: Head Assay Result of Enma Master Composite**

---

| | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Element** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Au1 (g/t)** | **Au2 (g/t)** | **Ag (g/t)** | **Cu** | **Fe** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Content (%) | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.92 | 0.89 | 36.6 | 0.078 | 6.63 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Element | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Pb | Zn | As(ppm) | Ssulfide | Corganic |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Content (%) | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.05 | 0.25 | 296 | 6.08 | <0.01 |

---

Source: Report of Investigation No.18525-73-89, Progress Report

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;12.5.2 Whole Ore Cyanidation

The results of WOCN in bottle roll tests at two different grind sizes are listed in Table 12.29. The gold extraction was 74.2% at the grind size of P80=75µm and 76.4% at the grind size of P80=45 µm.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 79

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Table 12.29: Whole Ore Cyanidation Results of the Enma MC Sample**

---

| | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **P<sub>80</sub> <br> (μm)** | **Time <br> (h)** | **Head Grade (g/t)** | **Head Grade (g/t)** | **Residue Grade (g/)** | **Residue Grade (g/)** | **Extraction (%)** | **Extraction (%)** | **Reagent <br> Consumption (kg/t)** | **Reagent <br> Consumption (kg/t)** |
| **P<sub>80</sub> <br> (μm)** | **Time <br> (h)** | **Au** | **Ag** | **Au** | **Ag** | **Au** | **Ag** | **NaCN** | **CaO** |
| 75 | 24 | 0.97 | 36.8 | 0.25 | 11.8 | 74.2 | 67.9 | 0.7 | 0.6 |
| 45 | 48 | 0.98 | 35.2 | 0.23 | 10.3 | 76.4 | 70.7 | 1.6 | 1 |

---

Source: Report of Investigation No.18525-73-89, Progress Report

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;12.5.3 Gravity Concentration and Cyanide Leach of Gravity Concentrate

The gravity concentration test at grind size of P80=210 µm for the Enma MC sample achieved 5.2% gold recovery (Table 12.30).

**Table 12.30: Results of Gravity Concentration of the Enma MC Sample**

---

| | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Product** | **Yield (%)** | **Head Grade (g/t)** | **Head Grade (g/t)** | **Distribution (%)** | **Distribution (%)** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Product** | **Yield (%)** | **Au** | **Ag** | **Au** | **Ag** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Gravity Concentrate | 0.32 | 16.4 | 284 | 5.2 | 2.5 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Tail | 99.68 | 0.94 | 34.6 | 94.8 | 97.5 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Head Calc | 100.00 | 0.99 | 35.4 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Head Assay |  | 0.85 | 36.6 |  |  |

---

Source: Report of Investigation No.18525-73-89, Progress Report

The WOCN in bottle roll tests for the gravity concentrate and tails (tail was reground to P80=75 µm) were carried out, and the results are listed in Table 12.31. The overall gold extraction was 71.5%, lower than the direct WOCN gold extraction of the Enma MC sample. The low gravity recovery and low overall gold extraction indicate that the gravity concentration is not suitable for the Enma ore.

**Table 12.31: Results of Gravity Concentration-Cyanidation of the Enma MC Sample**

---

| | | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Description** | **P<sub>80</sub> <br> (μm)** | **Time<br> (h)** | **Head Grade<br> (g/t)** | **Head Grade<br> (g/t)** | **Residue<br> Grade<br> (g/)** | **Residue<br> Grade<br> (g/)** | **Extraction<br> (%)** | **Extraction<br> (%)** | **Reagent<br> Consumption<br> (kg/t)** | **Reagent<br> Consumption<br> (kg/t)** |
|  |  |  | **Au** | **Ag** | **Au** | **Ag** | **Au** | **Ag** | **NaCN** | **CaO** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Gravity Concentrate | 210 | 24 | 16.0 | 284 | 2.81 | 110 | 82.8 | 61.3 | 13.2 | 0.5 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Gravity Tail | 75 | 24 | 0.94 | 34.6 | 0.27 | 11.4 | 70.9 | 67.1 | 0.8 | 0.6 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Overall Extraction |  |  |  |  |  |  | 71.5 | 67.0 | 0.84 | 0.60 |

---

Source: Report of Investigation No.18525-73-89, Progress Report

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;12.5.4 Grindability

The grindability of the mineralized material from Camp, Los Cuyes and Enma deposits are summarized in Table 12.32. The BBWi is Bond Ball Mill Work Index. The higher value indicates the harder grindability.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 80

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

The A\*b and SCSE are other indexes of grindability related to SAG mill grinding. The lower value of A\*b and the higher value of the SCSE imply harder rock. Generally, the ore hardness of these three deposits is in a medium range.

**Table 12.32: Summary of Ore Grindability**

---

| | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | | **Camp** | **Camp** | **Camp** | **Los Cuyes** | **Los Cuyes** | **Los Cuyes** | |
| | | **Low** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Medium** | **High** | **Low** | **Medium** | **High** | |
| <br>&nbsp;&nbsp;**Description** | <br>&nbsp;&nbsp;**Unit** | **Grade** | **Grade** | **Grade** | **Grade** | **Grade** | **Grade** | <br>**Enma** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;F80 | &nbsp;&nbsp;µm | 1652 | 1661 | 1615 | 2190 | 2174 | 2167 | 1967 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;P80 | &nbsp;&nbsp;µm | 119 | 120 | 119 | 118 | 118 | 118 | 119 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Mesh Size | &nbsp;&nbsp;µm | 150 | 150 | 150 | 150 | 150 | 150 | 150 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;BBWi | &nbsp;&nbsp;KWh/t | 14.2 | 16.6 | 13.8 | 13.3 | 12.2 | 12.1 | 11.7 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;A |  |  |  |  | 68 | 68.2 | 64.1 | 63.7 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;b |  |  |  |  | 0.70 | 0.80 | 1.07 | 1.27 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;A\*b |  |  |  |  | 47.6 | 54.6 | 68.6 | 80.9 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;SCSE | &nbsp;&nbsp;KWh/t |  |  |  | 8.99 | 8.49 | 7.77 | 7.45 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Specific Gravity (SG) |  |  |  |  | 2.58 | 2.56 | 2.56 | 2.79 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Abrasion Index (Ai) | &nbsp;&nbsp;g |  |  |  | 0.1049 | 0.0872 | 0.0720 | 0.0886 |

---

Source: multi metallurgical test reports

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;12.6 Conclusion
 and Recommendation

The valuable minerals of the Los Cuyes deposit (Los Cuyes West and Breccia Pipe) are gold, silver, sphalerite, galena and minor copper minerals. The responses to cyanidation and bulk flotation and bulk concentrate cyanidation are good for gold extraction, but silver extraction is poor for the bulk concentrate cyanidation. The process of bulk flotation and concentrate cyanidation achieved average gold recovery 89.7% and silver recovery 37.3%. The sequential selective flotation of the cyanide residue of bulk concentrate produced two valuable products: (1) a saleable zinc concentrate and (2) a lead concentrate containing a high-level silver. Detailed sequential selective flotation investigations on the cyanide leached bulk concentrate are recommended to produce the marketable lead concentrate and zinc concentrate.

The samples from the Camp deposit had a similar metallurgical behaviour to those samples from the Los Cuyes deposit. The gold, silver, lead and zinc respond well to the bulk flotation. The overall recovery of bulk flotation followed by concentrate cyanidation were 94% for gold and 50% for silver. Sequential selective flotations of the cyanide leached bulk concentrate likely produced a saleable lead/silver concentrate and a saleable zinc concentrate, but their recoveries were very low. Additionally, gravity concentration should be suitable for the Camp deposit considering the high-grade gold and silver in the gravity concentrate. Detailed sequential selective flotation investigations on the cyanide leached bulk concentrate are recommended to produce the marketable suitable lead concentrate and zinc concentrate.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 81

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

The gold cyanidation extraction from cyanide leach of the San Jose sample was significantly influenced by grind size. Fine grind size can result in higher gold and silver extractions. For the sample with 2.72 g/t gold and 26.7 g/t silver, under the conditions of grind of P90=75 µm, and cyanide leach retention time of 72 hours, the gold and silver extractions reached 91.6% and 82.0%, respectively. The San Jose sample contained a high sulfur content (pyrite). Flotation can enrich gold, silver, and sulfide minerals; however, the grind size used in the bulk flotation tests was too coarse (P80=500 µm), resulting in the low concentrate grades and recovery, and failing to produce marketable copper, lead, silver, or zinc concentrates. SRK recommends conducting the detailed bulk flotation tests, cyanide leach tests of the bulk flotation concentrate, and flotation tests of the cyanide leached bulk concentrate for silver, lead, and zinc. SRK anticipates that adopting a bulk flotation, cyanide leach of bulk concentrate and sequential selective flotation of the cyanide leached bulk concentrate will produce gold and silver bullion and also the marketable silver/lead and zinc concentrates.

The cyanide leach tests were conducted on an Enma ore sample which contained 0.97 g/t gold and 36.8 g/t silver. Under the operating conditions of grind size of P80=75 µm, and cyanide leach retention time of 24 hours, the gold and silver extractions reached 74.2% and 67.9%, respectively. Similar to the San Jose sample, the Enma sample had a high sulphur content (pyrite) and contained small amounts of copper, lead, and zinc. However, the flotation tests have not been conducted. It is recommended to conduct tests by following the flowsheet of the "bulk flotation-concentrate cyanidation-cyanidation tailings sequential selective flotation process" to reduce cyanide leach operating costs and to produce the marketable silver/lead and zinc concentrates.

The process of the whole ore cyanidation followed by flotation recovers extra gold and silver and probably produces a lead/silver concentrate and a zinc concentrate. The process cost is higher compared to the process of flotation and then concentrate cyanidation. Further metallurgical testwork is recommended to produce the marketable silver/lead concentrate and zinc concentrate.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 82

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

13 Mineral Resource Estimates

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.1 Introduction

The Condor Project comprises several deposits, however this section only focuses on the Camp, Los Cuyes, Soledad, and Enma deposits, which are included in the Mineral Resources estimation.

The Mineral Resource estimation work of the Condor Project was completed by SRK in 2025. The estimates are based on drilling samples information available up to 2023. The qualified person believes the drilling information is sufficiently reliable to interpret with confidence the boundaries for the deposits and that the assay data are sufficiently reliable to support Mineral Resource estimation. Mr. Mark Wanless (Pr.Sci.Nat, FGSSA), and Ms. Yanfang Zhao (MAusIMM), who are Principal Geologists from SRK have reviewed the drillhole database, geological model and the mineralisation domains generated by SVM, made some adjustments, performed the grade estimation, classified the Mineral Resources and prepared the Mineral Resource estimate using Datamine, Isatis.Neo and Leapfrog Geo and Edge.

The Qualified Person responsible for the Mineral Resources is Mr. Mark Wanless, who is a full-time employee of SRK Consulting (Canada) Inc.. (SRK Canada) and Registered with the South African Council for Natural Scientific Professionals as Pr.Sci.Nat, 400178/05, Fellow of the Geological Society of South Africa, Member of the Geostatistical Association of South Africa and a Member of the South African Institute for Mining and Metallurgy (SAIMM). Mr. Mark Wanless visited the Condor Project during June 19-20, 2024.

The Mineral Resources have been estimated in conformity with generally accepted CIM Estimation of Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves Best Practices Guidelines (2019) and are reported in accordance with the Canadian Securities Administrators' National Instrument 43-101.

Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves and do not have demonstrated economic viability. There is no certainty that all or any part of the Mineral Resource will be converted into Mineral Reserves.

This section describes the Mineral Resource estimation methodology and summarizes the key assumptions. The report author is not aware of any environmental, permitting, legal, title, taxation, socio- economic, marketing, political, or other relevant issues on the property. The Condor Project has all the required permits to conduct exploration on the property. The report author is not aware of any other significant factors and risks that may affect access, title, or the right or ability to perform on-going work programs on the property.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.2 Estimation Procedures

The Mineral Resource evaluation methodology involved the following procedures:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Database compilation and verification

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Geological interpretation for estimation domain

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Data preparation (compositing and capping) for geostatistical
analysis and variography

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 83

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Construction of the block model and grade interpolation

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Mineral Resource classification

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Model validation

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Assessment of "reasonable prospects for eventual economic
extraction" ("RPEEE") and selection of appropriate AuEq cut-off values for potential open pit Mineral Resources for
Soledad and Enma and underground for Camp and Los Cuyes

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Preparation of the Mineral Resource statement

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.3 Resource Database

The data provided for the Condor Project include the database in CSV format, including the collar locations, downhole survey results, geologic information, SG data, assay, grade shell wireframes, lithology wireframes, QAQC data, block models in csv format, Topo file, etc., and Resource Database summary is presented in Table 13.1, and the drillhole locations are shown in Figure 9.1.

**Table 13.1: Resource Database Summary for the Condor Project**

---

| | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Deposit** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Number of**<br> **Drill** **Holes** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Total Length of Drilling**<br> **(m)** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Total Length of<br> Samples in Drilling<br> (m)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Number of samples** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Camp | &nbsp;&nbsp;56 | &nbsp;&nbsp;27805 | &nbsp;&nbsp;15803 | &nbsp;&nbsp;24022 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Los Cuyes | &nbsp;&nbsp;44 | &nbsp;&nbsp;7613 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3980 | &nbsp;&nbsp;7576 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Soledad | &nbsp;&nbsp;117 | &nbsp;&nbsp;37513 | &nbsp;&nbsp;23607 | &nbsp;&nbsp;36263 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Enma | &nbsp;&nbsp;126 | &nbsp;&nbsp;20725 | &nbsp;&nbsp;12888 | &nbsp;&nbsp;20419 |

---

Notes: The summary has been sourced by SRK from the database provided by Silvercorp.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.4 Domain Modelling

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.4.1 Camp

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Rhyolite

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Vent Rhyolitic welded tuff

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Granodiorite

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Andecite-Dacite

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Diorite

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Greenstone

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 84

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ Rhyodacite

Figure 13.1 shows a plan view of the surface geology below the saprolite weathering. There is a northeast-striking fault (Piedras Blancas Fault) on the southeast side of the deposit that appears to cutoff or bound mineralization.

**Figure 13.1: Plan View of Condor Project Geology at Surface**

![](ex99-1_048.jpg)

Sources: SVM, 2024

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 85

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Figure 13.2: Cross Sections of the Veins CA-01 to CA-06 looking Northwest**

![](ex99-1_049.jpg)

Source: SVM, 2024.

The gold, silver, copper, and zinc mineralization is not confined by rock type, but there are distinct grade zones that form relatively cohesive vein-like geometries that run parallel to the footwall of the rhyolite. A total of six major mineralization trends were defined and named CA-01 to CA-06 by SVM with a clear relation to Rhyolite intrusions through veins-stringers, dissemination, and contacts (Figure 13.2).

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.4.2 Los Cuyes

The Los Cuyes mineralization is not directly lithologically controlled but is focussed around the rhyolite lapilli tuff vent in a series of shear structures and a lower grade disseminated halo of mineralization. Two faults play an important role in the mineralization, the northeast striking Piedras Blancas fault, which cuts off the mineralization to the southeast, and the northeast striking Los Cuyes west (LCW) structure in the northwest near the contact between the rhyolite lapilli tuff and the granodiorite.

Within the rhyolite lapilli tuff twelve north west striking shears which dip steeply to the northeast have been modelled (Figure 13.3). These NW striking structures are cut off against the LCW structure which also hosts significant mineralization (Figure 13.4). A lower grade halo of disseminated mineralization has been modelled surrounding these higher-grade shears, also constrained by the bounding structures, and predominantly within the rhyolite lapilli tuff.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 86

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Figure 13.3: Plan View of the Los Cuyes Shear Hosted Mineralization Models**

![](ex99-1_050.jpg)

Sources: SVM, 2024

Notes: NW structures modelled using a 3 g/t gold cut off, the LCW mineralization is modelled above a 1 g/t gold cut off

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 87

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Figure 13.4: Los Cuyes Vertical Cross Section looking North West**

![](ex99-1_051.jpg)

Sources: SVM, 2024

Notes: Only the 1 g/t LCW shell is used in the estimates

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.4.3 Soledad

Mineralization at Soledad is related to a felsic (rhyolitic) diatreme intrusion and associated breccias. No detailed lithological model was created for this area. The drilling database contains underlying geologic information, including lithology code designations derived from observations during core logging. Series of grade shell domains were interpreted for zones of continuous mineralization a set of intervals of Au g/t. Unlike Camp and Los Cuyes there is not yet a detailed geological interpretation for the Soledad deposit. A 0.2 g/t Au grade shell was chosen to constrain the mineralization, based on an assessment of several grade shell intervals, assessing the continuity of the mineralization (Figure 13.5). The lack of understanding of the geological controls on the mineralization will limit the estimation confidence.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 88

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Figure 13.5: Soledad Deposit 0.2 g/t Constraining Gold Grade Shell**

Source: SVM, 2024

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.4.4 Enma

Gold and silver mineralization at Enma is hosted in a west-northwest-trending rhyolitic breccia that occurs at the contact between andesite lapilli tuffs and the Zamora batholith. No detailed lithological model was created for this area. The deposit has dimensions of 280 m west-northwest, is approximately 20-75 m wide, and has a vertical extent of 350 m.

Similar to Soledad, a grade shell based on 0.1g/t Au Cutoff and ISO of 0.5 was generated by SRK Leapfrog Geo and Edge, and used for the estimation domain of Enma (Figure 13.6).

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 89

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Figure 13.6: Enma Deposit 0.1 g/t Constraining Gold Grade Shell**

![](ex99-1_053.jpg)

Sources: SVM data and SRK Model

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.5 Specific Gravity

Specific gravity (SG) data is only available for drill holes in the Los Cuyes and Camp areas. SG measurements are determined using the water immersion method (weight in air versus weight in water). SG measurements are undertaken on whole pieces of core spaced at approximately 10 m intervals down each drill hole.

Table 13.2 summarises the density data available per simplified logged lithology units within the Camp and Los Cuyes areas. These average densities are applied to the block model for each modelled lithology unit.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 90

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Table 13.2: Density Data for Camp and Los Cuyes per Lithology Code**

---

| | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
|  | **Los Cuyes** | **Los Cuyes** | **Camp** | **Camp** |
| **Lithology** | **Count** | **Average SG** | **Count** | **Average SG** |
| Dacite | 329 | 2.74 | 275 | 2.69 |
| Granodiorite | 308 | 2.74 | 1240 | 2.70 |
| Greenstone | 34 | 2.75 | 315 | 2.85 |
| Rhyodacite | 57 | 2.64 | 568 | 2.61 |
| Rhyolite lapilli tuff | 461 | 2.63 |  |  |
| Rhyolite North West | 97 | 2.65 | 2 | 2.58 |
| Rhyolite welded tuff | 6 | 2.68 | 83 | 2.64 |

---

Sources: SVM

Notes: Some simplifications of lithology units have been undertaken by SRK for average density calculations

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.6 Compositing

Compositing the drill hole samples helps standardize the database for further statistical evaluation. This step ensures that the data has consistent support, and can aid in reducing the high variance that may be introduced through short samples.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.6.1 Camp

Within the assay database of Camp, 45% of intervals are 1 m long, and 47% are 2 m long (Figure 13.7).

**Figure 13.7: Interval Length Histogram for the Camp Deposit**

![](ex99-1_054.jpg)

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 91

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

A composite length of 2 m and minimum coverage of 50% was selected for Camp. Composites were created within the mineralization wireframe domains beginning at the upper contacts. The intersection thickness encountered by any given drill hole, however, is not an even multiple of the composite length. if the remaining length was less than 1 m, the composite was distributed equally. The elimination of the small composites did not affect the overall integrity of the composited database. The compositing of samples before and after does not affect the overall distribution of the samples

(Figure 13.8:).

**Figure 13.8: Gold Grades Before and After Compositing (Camp)**

The average grades of composite datasets of each domain are shown in Table 13.3.

**Table 13.3: Camp Composites For Each Domain**

---

| | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domain** | **Count** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Ag g/t** | **Au g/t** | **Cu %** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pb %** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Zn %** | **As ppm** | **S %** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;CA-01 | 101 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;22.53 | 2.31 | 0.02 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.08 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.76 | 163.96 | 2.73 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;CA-02 | 77 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.00 | 1.18 | 0.01 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.04 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.44 | 38.65 | 1.65 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;CA-03 | 1266 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.06 | 1.54 | 0.02 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.05 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.53 | 113.19 | 2.96 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;CA-04 | 188 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.42 | 1.38 | 0.02 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.05 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.60 | 116.50 | 3.04 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;CA-05 | 198 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;14.94 | 1.40 | 0.02 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.07 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.52 | 96.93 | 2.60 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;CA-06 | 159 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;9.41 | 0.70 | 0.01 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.02 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.17 | 43.66 | 1.24 |

---

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 92

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.6.2 Los Cuyes

The Los Cuyes domains can be separated into the shear style domains and the surrounding disseminated halo domain. The consideration of the appropriate composite length is different for each of these since the dimensions of the domains are significantly different. For the shear domains the dimensions are similar to that discussed for camp, while for the disseminated halo the mineralization dimensions do not impact the choice of composite length. As with Camp the sample length distribution at Los Cuyes is bimodal with common values of 1 m (47% of samples) and 2 m 47% of samples with a minor population of variable samples as shown in Figure 13.9.

**Figure 13.9: Interval Length Histogram of Los Cuyes**

SRK undertook a composite optimisation considering arrange of composite lengths for each shear and halo domain. For the shear domains composite lengths of longer than 2 m resulted in a number of composites shorter than the target length due to the dimensions of the mineralized domain, and did not materially reduce the coefficient of variation. For the shear domains a composite length of 2 m was selected. For the halo domain a length of 3 m was selected as the coefficient of variation stabilised for composite lengths above this value. The compositing did not materially affect the average grades as is illustrated in Table 13.4 which shows the sample and composite Au g/t values, along with the value of the remaining residual samples at the margins of the domains.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 93

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Table 13.4: Los Cuyes Domain Sample and Composite Au g/t Grades with Residual Sample Grades**

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Domain** | **Sample** | **Composite** | **Residual** |
| LCW_1gpt | 3.14 | 3.14 | 11.04 |
| NW01_3gpt | 2.81 | 2.81 | 1.79 |
| NW9_3gpt | 5.89 | 5.89 | 9.51 |
| NW7_3gpt | 3.20 | 3.20 | 3.06 |
| NW3_3gpt | 11.30 | 11.30 | 3.92 |
| NW2_3gpt | 2.83 | 2.82 | 4.05 |
| NW5_3gpt | 8.52 | 8.52 | 4.53 |
| NW10_3gpt | 4.09 | 4.09 | 2.28 |
| NW8_3gpt | 5.17 | 5.17 | 3.12 |
| NW6_3gpt | 6.42 | 6.42 | 27.90 |
| NW13_3gpt | 6.61 | 6.61 | 7.54 |
| NW11_3gpt | 4.04 | 4.04 | 6.47 |
| NW15_3gpt | 6.73 | 6.74 | 2.93 |
| Halo | 0.65 | 0.65 | 0.62 |

---

As the halo domain residual value is not materially different to the mean for the domain, the residual sample was ignored. For the shear domains however the residual value can be significantly different to the composite values. Therefore for the shear domains the residual composite was merged with the previous composite to ensure the grade is not biased.

The declustered average grades of the 2 m and 3 m composite datasets are shown in Table 13.5.

**Table 13.5: Los Cuyes Deculstered Average Values for Estimated Variables in Each Domain**

---

| | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Domain** | **Count** | **Ag g/t** | **Au g/t** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Cu %** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pb %** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Zn %** | **Count** **<sup>1</sup>** | **As ppm** | **S %** |
| LCW | 246 | 27.7 | 5.43 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.04 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.24 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.78 | 158 | 521 | 4.46 |
| NW1 | 245 | 36.6 | 2.76 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.06 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.12 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.49 | 66 | 2670 | 4.41 |
| NW9 | 66 | 18.2 | 8.93 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.05 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.06 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.38 | 36 | 51 | 3.13 |
| NW7 | 40 | 23.0 | 3.25 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.04 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.08 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.31 | 21 | 89 | 3.37 |
| NW3 | 28 | 43.4 | 10.42 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.21 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.97 | 12 | 1152 | 6.85 |
| NW2 | 71 | 14.8 | 5.20 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.03 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.07 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.78 | 41 | 41 | 2.01 |
| NW5 | 9 | 63.6 | 7.68 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.06 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.11 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1.1 | 3 | 1692 | 6.3 |
| NW10 | 5 | 30.3 | 3.89 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.01 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.51 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.54 | 2 | 91 | 0.8 |
| NW8 | 12 | 28.5 | 5.37 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.02 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.67 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.47 | 6 | 107 | 2.73 |
| NW6 | 3 | 30.8 | 10.00 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.01 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.11 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.36 | 3 | 181 | 6.52 |
| NW13 | 7 | 55.7 | 6.24 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.04 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.07 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1.22 | 0 |  |  |
| NW11 | 13 | 19.9 | 5.26 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.02 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.05 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.35 | 0 |  |  |
| NW15 | 4 | 35.7 | 5.68 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.03 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.15 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.85 | 0 |  |  |
| Halo<sup>2</sup> | 3459 | 6.0 | 0.69 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.02 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.02 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.24 | 842 | 33 | 2.14 |

---

<sup>1</sup> As and S are not assayed for all drillholes resulting in different numbers of composites

<sup>2</sup> Composite length of 3 m

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 94

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.6.3 Soledad

The approach to compositing at Soledad is similar to that undertaken at Los Cuyes for the disseminated halo domain, since the domain definition using a grade shell has defined a similar kind of domain. The distribution of sample length is similarly grouped around 1 m (44%) and 2 m (50%) samples (see Figure 13.10).

**Figure 13.10: Interval Length Histogram of Soledad**

![](ex99-1_057.jpg)

A composite length of 2 m was selected for Soledad based on the composite optimisation results. As can be seen in Table 13.6, the compositing did not impact the mean grades; however, in this instance the grades of the residual samples are quite different, and therefore the residual samples are merged with the previous composite.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 95

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Table 13.6: Soledad Sample and Composite Grades with Residual Sample Grades**

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Variable** | **Sample** | **Composite** | **Residual** |
| Ag_ppm | 6.96 | 6.97 | 2.5 |
| As_ppm | 43.99 | 43.99 | 71.2 |
| Au_ppm | 0.96 | 0.96 | 0.19 |
| Cu_pct | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.01 |
| Pb_pct | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.02 |
| S_pct | 2.34 | 2.34 | 2.06 |
| Zn_pct | 0.51 | 0.51 | 0.19 |

---

The declustered average grades of the 2 m composite data are shown in Table 13.7.

**Table 13.7: Soledad Declustered Average Values for Estimated Variables**

---

| | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Domain** | **Count** | **Ag g/t** | **Au g/t** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Cu %** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pb %** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Zn %** | **Count** **<sup>1</sup>** | **As ppm** | **S %** |
| All | 5276 | 6.7 | 0.59 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.02 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.05 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.38 | 349 | 45 | 2.18 |

---

<sup>3</sup> As and S are not assayed for all drillholes resulting in different numbers of composites

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.6.4 Enma

Within the assay database, the average sample length is 1.9 m, about 11% of samples are 1 m long, and 83% are exactly 2 m long (Figure 13.11). A composite length of 2 m and minimum coverage of 50% was selected for Enma. The intersection thickness encountered by any given drill hole, however, is not an even multiple of the composite length. if the remaining length was less than 1 m, the composite was distributed equally. The compositing of samples before and after does not affect the overall distribution of the samples (Figure 13.12).

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 96

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Figure 13.11: Interval Length Histogram for Enma**

![](ex99-1_058.jpg)

**Figure 13.12: Before and After Compositing (Enma)**

![](ex99-1_059.jpg)

The average grades of the 2 m composite data of Enma are shown in Table 13.8.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 97

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Table 13.8: Enma Average Values for Estimated Varaibles**

---

| | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Domain** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Count** | **Ag g/t** | **Au g/t** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Cu %** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pb %** | **Zn %** | **Count** **<sup>1</sup>** | **As ppm** | **S %** |
| Enma | &nbsp;&nbsp;1615 | 15.39 | 1.07 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.02 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.08 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.31 | 44 | 188.58 | 5.36 |

---

<sup>1</sup> As and S are not assayed for all drillholes resulting in different numbers of composites

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.7 Evaluation of Outliers

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.7.1 Camp

Assay capping for the variables was applied after compositing for the mineralized domains of Camp. Capping values were selected based on the visual assessment of the variable histogram. No distance-based capping was determined to be required at Camp. The capping values and the impact of applying outlier capping are presented in Table 13.9.

**Table 13.9: Summary of Grade Capping Applied to Camp**

---

| | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Domain**<br>**Group** | **Variable** | **Mean** | **Cap Value** | **Capped**<br>**mean** | **Composite**<br>**Count** | **No Capped** | **Metal loss%** |
| Camp | &nbsp;&nbsp;Au g/t | 1.47 | 32 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1.47 | 1816 | 3 | 0.25 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Ag g/t | 13.29 | 330 | &nbsp;&nbsp;13.11 | 1816 | 1 | 1.41 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Pb % | 0.05 | 1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.05 | 1816 | 12 | 7.43 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Zn % | 0.52 | 5.9 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.51 | 1816 | 8 | 1.19 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Cu % | 0.02 |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;- | 1816 |  |  |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;As ppm | 105.72 | 1800 | &nbsp;&nbsp;94.94 | 1816 | 13 | 10.19 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;S % | 2.73 | - | &nbsp;&nbsp;- | 1816 | - | - |

---

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.7.2 Los Cuyes

For each of the variables to be estimated the need for treatment of outlier values was assessed. For deleterious variables such as Arsenic, the assessment and treatment of outlier values can be different to that of the economically valuable variables. The estimation domains are grouped according to the mineralization style for this exercise, the LCW shear, halo, and north west striking shears (NW shears). An initial assessment of each of the NW shears individually revealed that the distributions were materially similar where there is sufficient data to reasonably assess these.

The assessment considers the variable histogram, normal probability plot, and charts where samples are sorted from low to high and the impact of adding samples one by one to the dataset from low to high on the mean, standard deviation and coefficient of variation. The capping values and the impact of applying outlier capping is summarised in Table 13.10.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 98

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Table 13.10: Summary of Grade Capping Applied to Los Cuyes**

---

| | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Domain**<br> **Group** | **Variable** | **Mean** | **Cap** **<br> Value** | **Capped**<br> **mean** | **Composite**<br> **Count** | **No Capped** | **Metal loss%** |
| LCW | Au g/t | 3.37 | 40 | 3.01 | 246 | 2 | 10.62 |
|  | Ag g/t | 15.21 | 130 | 14.46 | 246 | 4 | 4.93 |
|  | Pb % | 0.09 | 1 | 0.08 | 246 | 5 | 8.99 |
|  | Zn % | 0.52 | 4 | 0.50 | 246 | 4 | 4.35 |
|  | Cu % | 0.04 |  |  | 246 |  |  |
|  | As ppm | 195.5 |  |  | 156 |  |  |
|  | S % | 3.89 | - | - | 156 | - | - |
| NW | Au g/t | 4.01 | 40 | 3.83 | 503 | 5 | 4.57 |
|  | Ag g/t | 25.23 | 300 | 24.06 | 503 | 4 | 4.26 |
|  | Pb % | 0.1 | 1.5 | 0.1 | 490 | 4 | 2.74 |
|  | Zn % | 0.71 | 6 | 0.69 | 503 | 5 | 3.69 |
|  | Cu % | 0.06 |  |  | 490 |  |  |
|  | As ppm | 211.4 |  |  | 190 |  |  |
|  | S % | 3.58 | - | - | 190 | - | - |
| Halo | Au g/t | 0.7 | 10 | 0.69 | 3459 | 3 | 1.68 |
|  | Ag g/t | 6.23 | 100 | 6.03 | 3459 | 8 | 0.23 |
|  | Pb % | 0.02 |  |  | 3443 |  |  |
|  | Zn % | 0.24 | 2 | 0.24 | 3443 | 8 | 0.51 |
|  | Cu % | 0.02 |  |  | 3443 |  |  |
|  | As ppm | 33.08 |  |  | 842 |  |  |
|  | S % | 2.14 | - | - | 842 | - | - |

---

Notes: Distance capping is also applied in some instances

For some domains, there remain isolated high values that can have a significant impact on the estimates. In these situations, and additional distance-based capping is applied. Where a composite is above the selected threshold and is also beyond a selected distance from the block, this secondary capping is applied. The secondary capping is not applied when the composite is closer to the estimating block than the selected distance. For the domains NW2, NW9 and LCW for gold a distance- based capping was also applied of 20 g/t, 20 g/t and 14 g/t respectively. The distance beyond which this capping is applied is 20 m in the plane of mineralization in the case of the NW group of domains, and 50 m for the LCW domain. For he LCW domain for arsenic only a distance-based capping at 1000 ppm with a distance of 20 m was applied.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 99

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.7.3 Soledad

The assessment of outliers used for Los Cuyes was also applied for Soledad. Only three variables had distributions which required capping at Soledad, and the capping parameters and effect are summarised in in Table 13.11.

**Table 13.11: Summary of Grade Capping Applied to Soledad**

---

| | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domain<br> Group** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Variable** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Mean** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Cap Value** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Capped** **mean** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Composite**<br> **Count** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**No Capped** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Metal loss%** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;All | &nbsp;&nbsp;Au g/t | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.96 | &nbsp;&nbsp;- |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;5276 |  |  |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Ag g/t | &nbsp;&nbsp;6.92 | &nbsp;&nbsp;60 | &nbsp;&nbsp;6.79 | &nbsp;&nbsp;5276 | &nbsp;&nbsp;26 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1.95 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Pb % | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.05 | &nbsp;&nbsp;- |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;4711 |  |  |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Zn % | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;- |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;5258 |  |  |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Cu % | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.02 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.02 | &nbsp;&nbsp;4711 | &nbsp;&nbsp;10 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1.7 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;As ppm | &nbsp;&nbsp;44.06 | &nbsp;&nbsp;- |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;349 |  |  |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;S % | &nbsp;&nbsp;2.34 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2.4 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;349 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.04 |

---

No distance-based capping was determined to be required at Soledad. In most instances, the high value composites which might otherwise have required distance-based capping are in densely sampled areas, where there is sufficient data to limit the range of influence of these high value composites.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.7.4 Enma

Assay capping for the variables was applied after compositing for the mineralized domains of Enma. Capping values were selected based on the visual assessment of the variable histogram, and the capping parameters and effect are summarised in in Table 13.12.

**Table 13.12: Summary of Grade Capping Applied to Enma**

---

| | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domain<br> Group** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Variable** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Mean** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Cap Value** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Capped**<br> **mean** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Composite**<br> **Count** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**No Capped** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Metal loss%** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Enma | &nbsp;&nbsp;Au g/t | &nbsp;&nbsp;1.47 | &nbsp;&nbsp;32 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1.47 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1816 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.25 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Ag g/t | &nbsp;&nbsp;13.29 | &nbsp;&nbsp;330 | &nbsp;&nbsp;13.11 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1816 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1.41 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Pb % | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.05 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.05 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1816 | &nbsp;&nbsp;12 | &nbsp;&nbsp;7.43 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Zn % | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.52 | &nbsp;&nbsp;5.9 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.51 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1816 | &nbsp;&nbsp;8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1.19 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Cu % | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.02 | &nbsp;&nbsp;- | &nbsp;&nbsp;- | &nbsp;&nbsp;1816 | &nbsp;&nbsp;- | &nbsp;&nbsp;- |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;As ppm | &nbsp;&nbsp;105.72 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1800 | &nbsp;&nbsp;94.94 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1816 | &nbsp;&nbsp;13 | &nbsp;&nbsp;10.19 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;S % | &nbsp;&nbsp;2.73 | &nbsp;&nbsp;- | &nbsp;&nbsp;- | &nbsp;&nbsp;1816 | &nbsp;&nbsp;- | &nbsp;&nbsp;- |

---

No distance-based capping was determined to be required at Enma. In most instances, the high value composites which might otherwise have required distance-based capping are in densely sampled areas, where there is sufficient data to limit the range of influence of these high value composites.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 100

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.8 Spatial Continuity Assessment

For each deposit and domain, SRK undertook an assessment of the continuity of each variable, considering the understanding of the geological controls on the mineralization, using tools such as the semi-variogram map, directional semi-variograms, swath plots, histograms and correlation plots to understand the relationships between variables, and their spatial continuity.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.8.1 Camp

For many of the Camp domains the assessment of the experimental semi-variograms did not show any interpretable structure in the data. This is potentially due to relatively small numbers of composites and relatively widely spaced intersections. For this group only domain CA-03 showed a sufficiently robust structure to allow modelling of a semi-variogram for gold, silver, copper, lead and zinc. The semi- variograms are modelled on normal score transforms of the variables, and the spherical structured modelled semi-variogram is back transformed into real space. The real space back transformed semi- variogram models are shown in Table 13.13 and examples of the semi-variogram models for gold and silver for the CA-03 domain are shown in Figure 13.13.

**Table 13.13: Camp Semi-Variogram Model Parameters**

---

| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | | | | | | **Structure 1** | **Structure 1** | **Structure 1** | **Structure 1** | **Structure 2** | **Structure 2** | **Structure 2** | **Structure 2** |
| <br>**Domain** | <br>**Variable** | &nbsp;&nbsp;<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Dip**<br> **(°)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Dip**<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Azimuth** **<br> (°)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Pitch** **<br> (°)** | <br>**Nugget** | <br> **Sill** | <br> **Major** | <br> **Int** | <br> **Minor** | <br> **Sill** | <br> **Major** | <br> **Int** | <br> **Minor** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;CA-03 | Ag_ppm | 84 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;49 | 18.37 | 174.3 | 349 | 26.7 | 25.4 | 5.9 | 39.9 | 147.7 | 122.8 | 12.1 |
|  | Au_ppm | 84 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;45 | 18.37 | 3.21 | 5.39 | 67.1 | 60.7 | &nbsp;&nbsp;13.7 | 1.42 | 166.0 | 158.0 | 28.9 |
|  | Cu_pct | 84 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;45 | 18.37 | 0.0003 | 0.0004 | 92 | 81.3 | 6.8 | 0.0002 | 168.3 | 138.8 | 21.3 |
|  | Pb_pct | 84 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;45 | 18.37 | 0.0022 | 0.008 | 71.6 | 67.7 | &nbsp;&nbsp;11.6 | 0.0021 | 165.2 | 155 | 32.8 |
|  | Zn_pct | 84 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;45 | 18.37 | 0.1088 | 0.3751 | 81.8 | 73.2 | 13 | 0.0646 | 152.4 | 142.2 | 26.5 |

---

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 101

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Figure 13.13: Camp CA-03 Domain Gaussian Space Semi-Variogram Models**

![](ex99-1_060.jpg)

Notes: CA-03 domain semi-variograms for gold (top) and silver (bottom).

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.8.2 Los Cuyes

For many of the NW domains the assessment of the experimental semi-variograms did not show any interpretable structure in the data. This is potentially due to relatively small numbers of composites and relatively widely spaced intersections. For this group only domain NW9 showed a sufficiently robust structure to allow modelling of a semi-variogram for gold, silver, copper, lead and zinc. Similarly for domain LCW the same variables have reasonably robust structures which allowed modelling of semi- variograms for the same variables. The semi-variograms are modelled on normal score transforms of the variables, and the spherical structured modelled semi-variogram is back transformed into real space. The real space back transformed semi-variogram models are shown in Table 13.14 and examples of the gaussian space semi-variogram models for gold and silver for the LCW domain are shown in Figure 13.14. The models are isotropic in the plane of mineralization.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 102

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Table 13.14: Los Cuyes Semi-variogram Model Parameters**

---

| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Domain** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Variable** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Dip (°)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; **Dip**<br>**Azimuth<br> (°)** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Pitch (°)** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Nugget** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Sill** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Structure 1**<br>**Major** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Int** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Minor** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Sill** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Structure 2**<br>**Major** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Int** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Minor** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;LCW | &nbsp;&nbsp;Ag_ppm | &nbsp;&nbsp;70 | &nbsp;&nbsp;150 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;429.1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;800.8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;180.3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;180.3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;102.6 | &nbsp;&nbsp;261.6 | &nbsp;&nbsp;522.1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;522.1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;49.5 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Au_ppm | &nbsp;&nbsp;70 | &nbsp;&nbsp;150 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;66.6 | &nbsp;&nbsp;80.1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;398.1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;398.1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;687.4 |  |  |  |  |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Cu_pct | &nbsp;&nbsp;70 | &nbsp;&nbsp;150 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.0005 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.0014 | &nbsp;&nbsp;121.6 | &nbsp;&nbsp;121.6 | &nbsp;&nbsp;8.5 |  |  |  |  |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Pb_pct | &nbsp;&nbsp;70 | &nbsp;&nbsp;150 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.0463 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.1256 | &nbsp;&nbsp;171.9 | &nbsp;&nbsp;171.9 | &nbsp;&nbsp;25.4 |  |  |  |  |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Zn_pct | &nbsp;&nbsp;70 | &nbsp;&nbsp;150 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.0930 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.4908 | &nbsp;&nbsp;15.6 | &nbsp;&nbsp;15.6 | &nbsp;&nbsp;13.8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.4 | &nbsp;&nbsp;205.2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;205.2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;37.2 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;NW9 | &nbsp;&nbsp;Ag_ppm | &nbsp;&nbsp;80 | &nbsp;&nbsp;20 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;147.5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;306.3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;57.0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;57.0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;16.2 |  |  |  |  |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Au_ppm | &nbsp;&nbsp;80 | &nbsp;&nbsp;20 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;149.4 | &nbsp;&nbsp;49.8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;61.8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;61.8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;17.0 |  |  |  |  |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Cu_pct | &nbsp;&nbsp;80 | &nbsp;&nbsp;20 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.0008 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.0016 | &nbsp;&nbsp;57.3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;57.3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;16.2 |  |  |  |  |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Pb_pct | &nbsp;&nbsp;70 | &nbsp;&nbsp;30 | &nbsp;&nbsp;320 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.0057 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.0015 | &nbsp;&nbsp;42.3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;33.6 | &nbsp;&nbsp;27.5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.0041 | &nbsp;&nbsp;109.3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;107.5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3.4 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Zn_pct | &nbsp;&nbsp;80 | &nbsp;&nbsp;20 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.0867 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.0228 | &nbsp;&nbsp;14.9 | &nbsp;&nbsp;14.9 | &nbsp;&nbsp;5.0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.2044 | &nbsp;&nbsp;52.4 | &nbsp;&nbsp;52.4 | &nbsp;&nbsp;16.9 |

---

Notes: Back-transformed models

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 103

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Figure 13.14: Los Cuyes LCW Domain Gaussian Space Semi-variogram Models**

![](ex99-1_061.jpg)

Notes: LCW domain semi-variograms for gold (top) and silver (bottom)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.8.3 Soledad

At Soledad within the grade shell the continuity assessment did not show any discernible anisotropy for the variables for which semi-variograms could be modelled. Only omni-directional experimental data showed sufficiently robust structures for semi-variogram modelling in this domain. For arsenic and sulphur there is insufficient data to model semi-variograms. The real space back transformed semi- variogram models are shown in Table 13.15 and examples of the gaussian space semi-variogram models for silver, gold, lead and zinc are shown in Figure 13.15.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 104

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Table 13.15: Soledad semi-variogram model parameters**

---

| | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| |  | | **Structure 1** | **Structure 1** | **Structure 2** | **Structure 2** |
| Domain | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Variable | Nugget | Sill | Range | Sill | Range |
| LCW | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Ag_ppm | 51.5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;17.3 | 27.1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;41.0 | 95.6 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Au_ppm | 0.965 | 0.282 | 39.0 |  |  |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Cu_pct | 0.0014 | 0.0018 | 40.6 | 0.0012 | 231.0 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Pb_pct | 0.0041 | 0.0016 | 85.1 | 0.0025 | 262.8 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Zn_pct | 0.0381 | 0.0340 | 23.1 | 0.0494 | 108.8 |

---

Notes: Back-transformed models

The structure in the experimental semi-variogram for gold is relatively poorly defined – the shape and ranges of continuity of the other variables were considered in the modelling of the gold semi-variogram.

**Figure 13.15: Soledad Gaussian Space Semi-variogram Models**

![](ex99-1_062.jpg)

Notes: Gaussian space semi-variograms for silver (top left), gold (top right), lead (bottom left) and zinc (bottom right)

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 105

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.8.4 Enma

The semi-variogram structure and examples of the models of Enma are shown in Table 13.16 and Figure 13.16.

**Table 13.16: Enma Semi-Variogram Model Parameters**

---

| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | | | | | | **Structure 1** | **Structure 1** | **Structure 1** | **Structure 1** | **Structure 2** | **Structure 2** | **Structure 2** | **Structure 2** |
| <br>**Domain** | <br>**Variable** | <br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <br> **Dip**<br> **(°)** | <br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <br> **Dip** **Azimuth**<br> **(°)** | <br>&nbsp;&nbsp; <br> **Pitch**<br> **(°)** | <br>**Nugget<br>** <br>| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <br>**Sill** | <br>**Major** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <br>**Int** | <br>**Minor** | <br>**Sill** | <br>**Major** | <br>**Int** | <br>**Minor** |
| Enma | Ag_ppm | 76 | 345 | 128 | 0.17 | 0.52 | 30 | 26.5 | 5.2 | 0.31 | 89.5 | 84.1 | 22.6 |
|  | Au_ppm | 76 | 345 | 128 | 0.16 | 0.4 | 14 | 12 | 10.6 | 0.44 | 80.1 | 57.8 | 18.1 |
|  | Cu_pct | 76 | 345 | 128 | 0.05 | 0.95 | 52.8 | 43.5 | 7.9 |  |  |  |  |
|  | Pb_pct | 76 | 345 | 128 | 0.35 | 0.33 | 31.3 | 20.4 | 2.4 | 0.32 | 99.3 | 40.7 | 39.5 |
|  | Zn_pct | 76 | 345 | 128 | 0.16 | 0.42 | 32.5 | 28.6 | 2.4 | 0.68 | 61.3 | 50.8 | 10.3 |

---

**Figure 13.16: Enma Semi-Variogram Models**

![](ex99-1_087.jpg)

Notes: semi-variograms for gold (top) and silver (bottom)

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 106

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.9 Block Model and Grade Estimation

The models with different block model origins, dimensions and rotations for each deposit were generated by SRK in the first quarter of 2025. A block model parameter summary is presented in Table 13.17 for each deposit. The choice of block size and size of the sub cells is dictated by the drill hole spacing, dimensions of the mineralization domains, with consideration given to possible mining methods and potential smallest mining unit dimensions.

---

| | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Table 13.17: Block Model Summary** | **Table 13.17: Block Model Summary** | **Table 13.17: Block Model Summary** | **Table 13.17: Block Model Summary** | **Table 13.17: Block Model Summary** | **Table 13.17: Block Model Summary** |
| **Deposit** | **Axis** | **Camp** | **Los Cuyes** | **Soledad** | **Enma** |
| Rotation | Z | No rotation | No rotation | No rotation | No rotation |
| Origin | X | 768260 | 768660 | 768990 | 770220 |
|  | Y | 9551790 | 9552330 | 9551170 | 9551820 |
|  | Z | 400 | 600 | 975 | 1200 |
| Extent | X | 769150 | 769690 | 769890 | 770670 |
|  | Y | 9552740 | 9553070 | 9552050 | 9552170 |
|  | Z | 1600 | 1770 | 1805 | 1920 |
| Block Size (m) | X | 10 | 10 | 20 | 10 |
|  | Y | 10 | 10 | 20 | 10 |
|  | Z | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 |
| Min Sub-cell | X | 1 | 0.25 | 0.5 | 2 |
|  | Y | 1 | 0.25 | 0.5 | 2 |
|  | Z | 1 | 0.25 | 0.5 | 2 |

---

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.9.1 Camp

Ordinary Kriging (OK) was used for grade estimation of CA-03, For the remaining domains the Au and Ag estimates were interpolated using inverse distance cubic (ID3) while Cu Pb Zn S and As estimates were interpolated using inverse distance squared (ID2). The search parameters were selected based on a kriging neighbourhood analysis for the domains with semi-variograms. For the domains estimated using ID2 and ID3 the optimised parameters selected for the kriged domains were used as the basis for selecting the search ranges and sample selection criteria. Variable orientation based on the footwall of the veins was applied to align to the mineralization model wireframe.

Generally, a three-pass search strategy is applied (Table 13.18), with the first search radius, where practical, selected to approximate the first structure in the semi-variogram or for single structure models to a range which approximated two thirds of the full semi-variogram range. The second search is generally aimed to align with the full semi-variogram range, while a third search is added to populate estimates for all blocks in the domain. The structure of the gold semi-variogram model is the primary determinant for the search ranges, however the structure of the other variables is also considered.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 107

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

The shorter first pass is used with the aim of generating high confidence local estimates where there is sufficient closely spaced data with a low degree of smoothing.

**Table 13.18: Camp Search Parameters**

---

| | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Domain** | **Dip** | **Dip <br> Azimuth** | **Pitch** | **Major** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Int** | **Minor** | **No<br> Sectors** | **Min <br> Samples** | **Max <br> Samples** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;CA-01 Pass 1 | 84 | 49 | 122 | 60 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;60 | 15 | 1 | 4 | 16 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;CA-01 Pass 2 | 84 | 49 | 122 | 120 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;120 | 30 | 1 | 3 | 16 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;CA-01 Pass 3 | 84 | 49 | 122 | 180 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;180 | 40 | 1 | 1 | 16 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;CA-02 Pass 1 | 89 | 45 | 90 | 60 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;60 | 20 | 1 | 4 | 16 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;CA-02 Pass 2 | 89 | 45 | 90 | 120 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;120 | 40 | 1 | 3 | 16 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;CA-02 Pass 3 | 89 | 45 | 90 | 180 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;180 | 60 | 1 | 1 | 16 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;CA-03 Pass 1 | 84 | 48 | 7 | 60 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;60 | 20 | 1 | 5 | 16 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;CA-03 Pass 2 | 84 | 48 | 7 | 120 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;120 | 40 | 1 | 3 | 36 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;CA-03 Pass 3 | 84 | 48 | 7 | 180 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;180 | 60 | 1 | 1 | 16 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;CA-04 Pass 1 | 81 | 41 | 90 | 60 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;60 | 15 | 1 | 4 | 16 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;CA-04 Pass 2 | 81 | 41 | 90 | 120 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;120 | 30 | 1 | 3 | 16 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;CA-04 Pass 3 | 81 | 41 | 90 | 180 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;180 | 40 | 1 | 1 | 16 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;CA-05 Pass 1 | 79 | 36 | 90 | 60 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;60 | 15 | 1 | 4 | 16 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;CA-05 Pass 2 | 79 | 36 | 90 | 120 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;120 | 30 | 1 | 3 | 16 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;CA-05 Pass 3 | 79 | 36 | 90 | 180 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;180 | 40 | 1 | 1 | 16 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;CA-06 Pass 1 | 84 | 46 | 90 | 60 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;60 | 15 | 1 | 4 | 16 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;CA-06 Pass 2 | 84 | 46 | 90 | 120 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;120 | 30 | 1 | 3 | 16 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;CA-06 Pass 3 | 84 | 46 | 90 | 180 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;180 | 40 | 1 | 1 | 16 |

---

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| Notes: | Search parameters listed applied to Au, Ag, Cu, Pb, Zn, S and As estimates |
|  | Larger search ranges are applied after the third search pass where needed to inform all blocks in the domain<br> Local search orientations are applied based on the domain wireframe orientation |

---

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 108

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.9.2 Los Cuyes

In the domains for which semi-variograms were modelled Ordinary Kriging (OK) was used for grade estimation. For the remaining domains the estimates were interpolated using inverse distance squared (ID2). The search parameters were selected based on a kriging neighbourhood analysis for the domains with semi-variograms. For the domains estimated using ID2 the optimised parameters selected for the kriged domains were used as the basis for selecting the search ranges and sample selection criteria. The orientation of the search parameters is modified for each block to align to the mineralization model wireframe.

Generally, a three-pass search strategy is applied (Table 13.19), with the first search radius, where practical, selected to approximate the first structure in the semi-variogram or for single structure models to a range which approximated two thirds of the full semi-variogram range. The second search is generally aimed to align with the full semi-variogram range, while a third search is added to populate estimates for all blocks in the domain. The structure of the gold semi-variogram model is the primary determinant for the search ranges, however the structure of the other variables is also considered. The shorter first pass is used with the aim of generating high confidence local estimates where there is sufficient closely spaced data with a low degree of smoothing.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 109

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Table 13.19: Los Cuyes Search Parameters**

---

| | | | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Domain** | **Dip** | **Dip azimuth** | **Pitch** | **Major** | **Int** | **Minor** | **No sectors** | **Min** | **Max Per<br> Sector** | **Max Per<br> Drillhole** | **Min<br> Drillholes** |
| LCW Pass 1 | 70 | 150 | 0 | 60 | 60 | 30 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 2 |
| LCW Pass 2 | 70 | 150 | 0 | 100 | 100 | 40 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 2 |
| LCW Pass 3 | 70 | 150 | 0 | 265 | 265 | 60 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 2 |
| NW9 Pass 1 | 80 | 20 | 0 | 60 | 60 | 25 | 1 | 5 | 16 |  |  |
| NW9 Pass 2 | 80 | 20 | 0 | 120 | 120 | 38 | 1 | 4 | 16 |  |  |
| NW9 Pass 3 | 80 | 20 | 0 | 120 | 180 | 63 | 1 | 3 | 16 | - | - |
| NW ID2 Pass 1 | 80 | 30 | 90 | 60 | 60 | 25 | 1 | 5 | 14 |  | 2 |
| NW ID2 Pass 2 | 80 | 30 | 90 | 120 | 120 | 25 | 1 | 1 | 16 |  | 2 |
| NW ID2 Pass 3 | 80 | 30 | 90 | 180 | 180 | 25 | 1 | 1 | 16 | - | 2 |
| Halo Pass 1 | 40 | 220 | 0 | 50 | 50 | 15 | 4 | 6 | 5 |  | 2 |
| Halo Pass 2 | 40 | 220 | 0 | 100 | 100 | 25 | 4 | 5 | 4 |  | 2 |
| Halo Pass 3 | 40 | 220 | 0 | 200 | 200 | 40 | 4 | 4 | 4 | - | 2 |

---

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| Notes: | Search parameters listed applied to Au, Ag, Cu, Pb, and Zn. For all shear domains the NW ID2 parameters are applied for As and S estimates |
|  | Larger search ranges are applied after the third search pass where needed to inform all blocks in the domain |
|  | Local search orientations are applied based on the domain wireframe orientation |

---

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 110

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.9.3 Soledad

The Soledad variables were estimated using OK except for arsenic and sulphur which were interpolated using ID2. The search parameters were selected based on a kriging neighbourhood analysis for the variables with semi-variograms. For the variables estimated using ID2 the optimised parameters selected for the kriged domains were used as the basis for selecting the search ranges and sample selection criteria, however these are modified as not all drill holes have assays for these two variables.

A three-pass search strategy was employed for each variable, with the first search range being the full semi-variogram range for the precious metals, but a fraction of the full variogram range for the base metals. The search parameters applied are summarised in Table 13.20.

**Table 13.20: Soledad Search Parameters**

---

| | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Search** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Variable** | **Range** | **Min** | **Max per sector** | **No Sectors** |
| Pass 1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Ag ppm | 100 | 5 | 18 | 1 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Au ppm | 100 | 5 | 26 | 1 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Cu% | 100 | 5 | 16 | 1 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Pb% | 100 | 5 | 16 | 1 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Zn% | 100 | 5 | 5 | 4 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;As ppm | 100 | 5 | 22 | 1 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;S% | 100 | 5 | 14 | 1 |
| Pass 2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Ag ppm | 150 | 5 | 18 | 1 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Au ppm | 150 | 5 | 24 | 1 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Cu% | 150 | 5 | 14 | 1 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Pb% | 150 | 5 | 14 | 1 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Zn% | 150 | 5 | 12 | 1 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;As ppm | 200 | 4 | 16 | 1 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;S% | 200 | 4 | 16 | 1 |
| Pass 3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Ag ppm | 300 | 3 | 16 | 1 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Au ppm | 300 | 3 | 20 | 1 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Cu% | 300 | 3 | 12 | 1 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Pb% | 300 | 3 | 12 | 1 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Zn% | 300 | 3 | 10 | 1 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;As ppm | 300 | 2 | 16 | 1 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;S% | 300 | 2 | 16 | 1 |

---

Notes: In the first search pass for gold, silver, copper, lead and zinc a minimum of two holes is required, and an optimum of four composites per hole is applied

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.9.4 Enma

The Enma variables were estimated using OK for Au, Ag Cu, Pb and Zn. The search parameters were selected based on a kriging neighbourhood analysis for the variables with semi-variograms. Due to relatively small numbers of composites the experimental semi-variogram for S and As was not defined, and S and As were interpolated using ID2.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 111

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

A three-pass search strategy was employed for each variable. The search parameters applied are summarised in Table 13.21.

**Table 13.21: Enma Search Parameters**

---

| | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Search** | **Variable** | **Range** | **Dip** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Dip azimuth** | **Pitch** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Min Samples** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Max per sector** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**No Sectors** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Pass 1 | Ag ppm | 30 | 76 | 345 | 124 | 5 | 10 | 3 |
|  | Au ppm | 30 | 77 | 345 | 128 | 5 | 10 | 3 |
|  | Cu% | 30 | 77 | 345 | 128 | 5 | 10 | 3 |
|  | Pb% | 30 | 77 | 345 | 128 | 5 | 10 | 3 |
|  | Zn% | 30 | 77 | 345 | 128 | 5 | 10 | 3 |
|  | As ppm | 30 | 77 | 345 | 128 | 5 | 10 | 3 |
|  | S% | 30 | 77 | 345 | 128 | 5 | 10 | 3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Pass 2 | Ag ppm | 50 | 76 | 345 | 124 | 4 | 10 | 3 |
|  | Au ppm | 50 | 77 | 345 | 128 | 4 | 10 | 3 |
|  | Cu% | 50 | 77 | 345 | 128 | 4 | 10 | 3 |
|  | Pb% | 50 | 77 | 345 | 128 | 4 | 10 | 3 |
|  | Zn% | 50 | 77 | 345 | 128 | 4 | 10 | 3 |
|  | As ppm | 50 | 77 | 345 | 128 | 4 | 10 | 3 |
|  | S% | 50 | 77 | 345 | 128 | 4 | 10 | 3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Pass 3 | Ag ppm | 100 | 76 | 345 | 124 | 2 | 10 | 1 |
|  | Au ppm | 100 | 77 | 345 | 128 | 2 | 10 | 1 |
|  | Cu% | 100 | 77 | 345 | 128 | 2 | 10 | 1 |
|  | Pb% | 100 | 77 | 345 | 128 | 2 | 10 | 1 |
|  | Zn% | 100 | 77 | 345 | 128 | 2 | 10 | 1 |
|  | As ppm | 100 | 77 | 345 | 128 | 2 | 10 | 1 |
|  | S% | 100 | 77 | 345 | 128 | 2 | 10 | 1 |

---

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 112

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.10 Model Validation

Model validation is a common approach for determining whether grade estimation has performed as expected. An acceptable or preferred validation result does not necessarily imply that the model is correct or derived from the right estimation approach. It suggests only that the model is a reasonable representation of the resource data used and of the estimation method applied. Other issues such as the relationship between the model-selectivity assumptions and mining practices are equally important when determining the appropriateness of the Mineral Resource estimate.

For each deposit SRK undertook a range of validations including visual validations of the estimates and informing data, comparisons of the mean values of the data and estimates per estimation domain and swath plots to assess the reproduction of the spatial variability of the variables. Selected examples of these are presented for each deposit to illustrate the conclusions drawn from analysing the validations.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.10.1 Camp

For the domains of Camp, the validations are affected by irregularly spaced and relatively small number of intersections, changes in the thickness of the modelled domains, isolated high values, capping, as well as the higher variance associated with higher grades. The mean grades of the composites and the mean of the classified Mineral Resources are shown in Table 13.22.

**Table 13.22: Camp per Domain Comparison Between Composites and Estimates**

---

| | | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Au g/t** | **Au g/t** | **Ag g/t** | **Ag g/t** | **Pb %** | **Pb %** | **Zn %** | **Zn %** | **Cu %** | **Cu %** |
| <br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Domain** | **Comp** | **Est** | **Comp** | **Est** | **Comp** | **Est** | **Comp** | **Est** | **Comp** | **Est** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;CA-01 | 2.33 | 2.33 | 15.83 | 16.90 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.69 | 0.70 | 0.02 | 0.02 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;CA-02 | 1.26 | 1.36 | 7.58 | 7.73 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.50 | 0.58 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;CA-03 | 1.54 | 1.70 | 12.43 | 13.53 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.53 | 0.60 | 0.02 | 0.02 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;CA-04 | 1.41 | 1.32 | 13.54 | 13.68 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.61 | 0.54 | 0.02 | 0.02 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;CA-05 | 1.43 | 1.29 | 13.14 | 12.06 | 0.07 | 0.05 | 0.52 | 0.49 | 0.02 | 0.02 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;CA-06 | 0.73 | 0.59 | 9.52 | 8.13 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.17 | 0.19 | 0.01 | 0.01 |

---

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 113

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Figure 13.17: Vertical Section of The Camp Ca-03 Domain Gold Distribution Looking North**

![](ex99-1_064.jpg)

Comparisons between the global mean for the composites and block models for each vein shows some differences, which are a result of the heterogenous nature of the mineralization, and the spatial grade distribution and variable intersection spacing. The example of gold distribution of CA-03, which is the biggest vein of Camp was shown in Figure 13.20.

The swath plots of combined domain of Camp were shown in Figure 13.18 and Figure 13.19, which shows the block models and composites match reasonably well in all orthogonal directions in the central area of the domain but with poorer correlation in the area with fewer samples . However, these areas have been reasonably classified as Inferred or not classified as Mineral Resources and additional exploration will be required to support declaration of a Mineral Resource in these areas.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 114

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Figure 13.18: Camp X Swath Plots for Gold, Silver, Lead and Zinc**

![](ex99-1_065.jpg)

**Figure 13.19: Camp Z Swath Plots for Gold, Silver, Lead and Zinc**

![](ex99-1_066.jpg)

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 115

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.10.2 Los Cuyes

The number of informing composites in the halo domain is significantly more than is available for any of the shear hosted domains. For the tabular shear hosted domains, the validations are affected by irregularly spaced and relatively small number of intersections, changes in the thickness of the modelled domains, isolated high values, capping, as well as the higher variance associated with higher grades. The comparison between estimates and composites in these domains shows quite variable correlations. The declustered mean grades of the composites and the mean of the classified Mineral Resources are shown in Table 13.23.

Some domains (such as NW6, NW7) show very close correlation between the composites and estimate for all variables, while others (such as NW1, NW2, NW15) show good correlations for some variables and weaker matching for others. In the LCW domain the estimates appear to underestimate the grades when compared to the composites. However, when considering the spatial grade distribution and variable intersection spacing, the reason for this is apparent as is illustrated in Figure 13.20. The widely spaced but very high-grade intersections on the western margin of the deposit are intentionally affected by capping to reduce the risk of over estimation, but these will have an impact on the mean grades. The central core of the domain is thicker than the margins and is also lower grade.

**Table 13.23: Los Cuyes Per Domain Comparison Between Composites and Estimates**

---

| | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Au g/t** | **Au g/t** | **Ag g/t** | **Ag g/t** | **Pb %** | **Pb %** | **Zn %** | **Zn %** |
| <br>**Domain** | **Comp** | **Est** | **Comp** | **Est** | **Comp** | **Est** | **Comp** | **Est** |
| LCW | &nbsp;&nbsp;4.95 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2.81 | 26.17 | 16.61 | 0.208 | 0.100 | 0.75 | 0.55 |
| NW1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2.77 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2.67 | 36.33 | 27.23 | 0.111 | 0.095 | 0.49 | 0.68 |
| NW2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;4.32 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3.27 | 14.37 | 10.62 | 0.068 | 0.065 | 0.78 | 0.87 |
| NW3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;10.10 | 10.28 | 40.41 | 44.56 | 0.215 | 0.199 | 0.84 | 1.01 |
| NW5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;7.69 | &nbsp;&nbsp;9.90 | 63.61 | 79.38 | 0.108 | 0.159 | 1.10 | 1.51 |
| NW6 | &nbsp;&nbsp;10.00 | 10.10 | 30.78 | 30.85 | 0.110 | 0.110 | 0.36 | 0.37 |
| NW7 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3.25 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3.21 | 23.03 | 23.01 | 0.076 | 0.060 | 0.31 | 0.25 |
| NW8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;5.37 | &nbsp;&nbsp;4.18 | 28.49 | 28.57 | 0.325 | 0.664 | 0.47 | 0.53 |
| NW9 | &nbsp;&nbsp;7.22 | &nbsp;&nbsp;4.47 | 18.15 | 13.40 | 0.056 | 0.040 | 0.38 | 0.49 |
| NW10 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3.89 | &nbsp;&nbsp;4.12 | 30.32 | 33.43 | 0.315 | 0.576 | 0.55 | 0.59 |
| NW11 | &nbsp;&nbsp;5.26 | &nbsp;&nbsp;4.02 | 19.92 | 18.31 | 0.050 | 0.065 | 0.35 | 0.28 |
| NW13 | &nbsp;&nbsp;6.24 | &nbsp;&nbsp;6.71 | 39.63 | 57.81 | 0.073 | 0.108 | 1.22 | 0.70 |
| NW15 | &nbsp;&nbsp;5.69 | &nbsp;&nbsp;5.40 | 35.71 | 33.42 | 0.153 | 0.185 | 0.85 | 0.75 |
| Halo | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.69 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.75 | 5.40 | &nbsp;&nbsp;5.71 | 0.020 | 0.024 | 0.23 | 0.21 |

---

Some domains (such as NW6, NW7) show very close correlation between the composites and estimate for all variables, while others (such as NW1, NW2, NW15) show good correlations for some variables and weaker matching for others.

In the LCW domain the estimates appear to underestimate the grades when compared to the composites. However, when considering the spatial grade distribution and variable intersection spacing, the reason for this is apparent as is illustrated in Figure 13.20. The widely spaced but very high-grade intersections on the western margin of the deposit are intentionally affected by capping to reduce the risk of over estimation, but these will have an impact on the mean grades. The central core of the domain is thicker than the margins and is also lower grade. This can also be observed in the swath plots in Figure 13.21

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 116

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

which highlights the higher tonnage and lower grades in the central core and elevated grades on the western margin informed by relatively few composites. Composite mean values are shown in blue (Au g/t) and estimated values in red (Au g/t\*).

In aggregate, the visual validations indicate that there is a relatively good reproduction of the composite grades however the grade distribution is quite variable, and additional exploration will be required to support detailed mine planning.

**Figure 13.20: Vertical Section of the Los Cuyes LCW Domain Gold Distribution Looking North**

![](ex99-1_067.jpg)

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 117

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Figure 13.21: Los Cuyes X Swath Plots for Gold, Silver and Zinc in the LCW Domain**

Notes: Composite mean values are shown in blue (Au g/t) and estimated values in red (Au g/t\*)

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 118

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

For the halo domain there is significantly more informing data, and relatively lower variance in the variable grades compared to the tabular domains. The correlation between the estimates and information data in the swath plots in Figure 13.22 is considered to be good.

**Figure 13.22: Los Cuyes Z Swath Plots for Gold, Silver and Zinc in the Halo Domain**

Notes: Composite mean values are shown in blue (Au g/t) and estimated values in red (Au g/t\*)

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 119

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.10.3 Soledad

The grade distribution at Soledad is variable, with higher grades of gold close to surface at the core of the grade shells, transitioning to a lower grade disseminated style of mineralization with greater depth. The base metals are more evenly distributed within the grade shell. The gold distribution is illustrated in Figure 13.23. The estimated grades overall show a good correlation with the composite data.

**Figure 13.23: Soledad Vertical Cross Section Looking West Showing Gold Grade**

![](ex99-1_070.jpg)

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 120

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Figure 13.24: Soledad Y and Z Swath Plots for Gold**

![](ex99-1_071.jpg)

Notes: Composite mean values are shown in blue (Au g/t) and estimated values in red (Au g/t\*)

**Table 13.24: Soledad Global Comparison Between Composites and Estimates**

---

| | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Deposit** | **Au g/t** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Ag g/t** | **Cu %** | **Pb %** | **Zn %** |
| Composites | 0.59 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;6.40 | 0.022 | 0.046 | 0.38 |
| Estimates | 0.56 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;6.70 | 0.024 | 0.042 | 0.41 |
| % difference | -5.8% | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;4.8% | 9.0% | -8.2% | 8.2% |

---

Notes: Composite grades are dedeclustered, only Indicated and Inferred estimates are included

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 121

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.10.4 Enma

The grade distribution at Enma is variable. The gold distribution is illustrated in Figure 13.23. The estimated grades overall show a good correlation with the composite data.

**Figure 13.25: Enma vertical Cross Section Looking South Showing Gold Grade**

![](ex99-1_072.jpg)

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 122

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Table 13.25: Enma global comparison between composites and estimates**

---

| | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Deposit** | **Au g/t** | **Ag g/t** | **Cu %** | **Pb %** | **Zn %** |
| Composites | 0.64 | 12.43 | 0.02 | 0.08 | 0.31 |
| Estimates | 0.64 | 13.39 | 0.02 | 0.07 | 0.30 |
| % difference | 0.4% | 7.7% | 7.9% | -13.8% | -3.9% |

---

Notes: Composite grades are average, only Indicated and Inferred estimates are included

**Figure 13.26: Enma X and Z Swath Plots for Gold**

![](ex99-1_073.jpg)

Notes: Composite mean values are shown in blue (Au g/t) and estimated values in red (Au g/t\*)

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 123

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.11 Mineral Resource Classification

Mineral Resource classification is typically a subjective concept, industry best practices suggest that Mineral Resource classification should consider both the confidence in the geological continuity of the mineralized structures, the quality and quantity of exploration data supporting the estimates and the geostatistical confidence in the tonnage and grade estimates. Appropriate classification criteria should aim at integrating both concepts to delineate regular areas at similar resource classification.

In the QP's opinion, the applied core handling, logging, sampling, and core storage protocols on the Condor Project are consistent with industry standards, and the QP is not aware of any drilling, sampling, or recovery factors that could materially impact the accuracy and reliability of these results. The analytical QAQC program has been in place over the duration of the exploration programs and has been used to monitor the accuracy and precision of the analytical laboratories. The QAQC data confirm that the analytical results have an acceptable accuracy and precision for use in Mineral Resource estimation, and do not represent a constraint in the classification of Mineral Resources. For Enma there is insufficient QAQC data from which to draw meaningful conclusions, however the quality of the assay results for Enma are expected to be consistent with that of the other deposits.

The exploration data and analytical results are of acceptable confidence and have been generated and managed by a competent team for the duration of the exploration programmes.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.11.1 Camp

SVM has a credible interpretation of the mineralization controls that inform the geological modelling. The lithological modelling is generally consistent with the geological logging data and presents a reasonable interpretation of the lithologies which hosts the mineralization.

No Measured Mineral Resources are classified at Camp.

The drilling density is variable over the extent of the Camp. The largest domain is the CA-03 domain. This domain has the most intersections and is relatively thicker than the other domains. The core of the deposit is relatively well drilled, and in the model densely drilled area the drill hole spacing approximates 30 to 100 m. For the CA-03 domain blocks which have a slope of regression of greater than 0.7, are estimated in the first or second search pass, have an average distance of 60 m to the informing composites and are estimated with at least 3 drillholes support an Indicated classification. Blocks which are estimated within search passes 1 to 3 with at least 2 drillholes and minimum samples distance no more than 120 m are classified as Inferred Mineral Resources. Blocks behind this are not classified as Mineral Resources (Figure 13.27).

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 124

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Figure 13.27: Plan Showing Camp Domain CA-03 Classification**

![](ex99-1_074.jpg)

Notes: Wireframe of domain CA-03 shown for context

Some area of CA-05 is intersected relatively closely spaced drill holes (<60 m). Block which are estimated in the first search pass, support an Indicated classification with at least 3 holes, with the remainder of the domain estimated in the second and third search pass with at least 2 drillholes and minimum samples distance no more than 120 m was classified as Inferred Mineral Resources (Figure 13.28).

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 125

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Figure 13.28: Plan Showing Camp Domain CA-05 Classification**

![](ex99-1_075.jpg)

Notes: Wireframe of domain CA-05 shown for context

For other domains, Since CA-01 are relative thinner, drilling density of CA-02, CA-04 and CA-06 is variable over the extent of the domain, the confidence in the continuity of the mineralization is lower than that of the more extensive and better-informed domains. For these domains, the confidence in the domain and grade continuity only supports the classification of Inferred Mineral Resources, for blocks estimated in search passes 1 to 3 with at least 2 drillholes and minimum samples distance no more than 120 m.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.11.2 Los Cuyes

SVM has a credible interpretation of the mineralization controls that inform the geological modelling. The lithological modelling is generally consistent with the geological logging data and presents a reasonable interpretation of the lithologies which hosts the mineralization.

No Measured Mineral Resources are classified at Los Cuyes.

For several of the NW domains there are only a small number of relatively widely spaced intersections. These are NW3, NW7, NW8, NW9, NW10, NW11, NW13 and NW15. The confidence in the continuity of the mineralization is lower than that of the more extensive and better-informed domains. For these domains, the confidence in the domain and grade continuity only supports the classification of Inferred Mineral Resources, for blocks estimated in the three search passes.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 126

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

NW5 is a relatively small domain, which is intersected by five relatively closely spaced drill holes (<50 m). Block which are estimated in the first search pass, support an Indicated classification, with the remainder of the domain estimated in the second search pass classified as Inferred Mineral Resources. The NW5 classification is illustrated in Figure 13.29.

**Figure 13.29: Section Showing Los Cuyes Domain NW5 Classification**

![](ex99-1_076.jpg)

Notes: Wireframe of domain LCW shown for context

NW1 is a larger domain, with nineteen intersections, several of which are in the thicker central part of the domain, resulting in a relatively large number of samples in the domain. The drilling density is variable over the extent of the domain, with some areas having very closely spaced data (< 10 m between intersections), and other areas with intersection spacings greater than 150 m. For NW1 the blocks which are estimated in the first search pass, which are informed by more than six composites, and for which the average distance to the informing composites is less than 40 m support classification as Indicated Mineral Resources. As is illustrated in Figure 13.30 there is a portion of the domain with closely spaced drilling in a limited area. Although there are block in this area that meet the above criteria, this area is otherwise poorly informed and does not support an Indicated classification. The remainder of the estimation domain is classified as an Inferred Mineral Resource.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 127

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Figure 13.30: Section Showing Los Cuyes Domain NW1 Classification**

Notes: Wireframe of domain LCW shown for context

The same criteria discussed for domain NW1 are applied for domain NW2, which results in a central portion of the domain supporting an Indicated classification, with the majority of the wider spaced domain classified as an Inferred Mineral Resource.

The largest domain at Los Cuyes is the LCW domain. This domain has the most intersections and is relatively thicker than the NW group of domains. The core of the deposit is relatively well drilled, however the semi-variogram ranges are not long relative to the drill hole spacing (Figure 13.31). In the model densely drilled area the drill hole spacing approximates 30 to 60 m. For the LCW domain blocks which have a slope of regression of greater than 0.7, are estimated in the first or second search pass, have an average distance of 40 m to the informing composites and are estimated with at least 8 composites support an Indicated classification. Blocks which have a slope of regression of greater than 0.5 and are estimated within search passes 1 to 3 are classified as Inferred Mineral Resources. Blocks behind this are not classified as Mineral Resources (Figure 13.31).

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 128

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Figure 13.31: Section Showing Los Cuyes Domain LCW Classification**

Notes: Drill holes plotted in blue

Finally, for the disseminated halo domain, blocks estimated in the first search pass, with an average distance to composites of 40 m or less and estimated with a minimum of six composites support an Indicated classification. Beyond these blocks, all blocks estimated in the first or second search pass are classified as Inferred Mineral Resources.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.11.3 Soledad

The mineralization controls and geological framework at Soledad are not well understood at present. There is no detailed lithological model available for this area. The constraints on the mineralization are limited to the grade shell that is modelled by SVM. The majority of the drilling is concentrated in three area, with a smaller number of wider spaced holes. The continuity modelled for gold is lower than that of the other variables modelled, particularly the base metals which have relatively longer ranges of continuity. In the densely drilled areas the drill hole spacing is in places as close as 10 m (Figure 13.32). There are areas where the grade is consistently elevated, which coincides with the densest drilling in many instances.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 129

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

No Measured Mineral Resources are classified at Soledad. Blocks which have a slope of regression of greater than 0.6 for silver and greater than 0.5 for gold, have an average distance of less than 50 m to the informing composites, and are estimated in the first search pass support an Indicated classification. The Inferred classification is limited to blocks within 75m of a composite sample. The majority of the grade envelope is classified as either Indicated or Inferred. Only 14% of the volume within the grade envelope does not meet these criteria and is not classified.

**Figure 13.32: Section Showing Soledad Indicated Mineral Resource classification**

Notes: Drill holes are coloured according to gold grade. The grade envelope is shown in pink, and the blocks classified as Indicated Mineral Resources are shown in green

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.11.4 Enma

There is no detailed lithological model available for Enma. The constraints on the mineralization are limited to the grade shell that is modelled by SRK. In the densely drilled areas the drill hole spacing is in places as close as 10 m (Figure 13.33). There are areas where the grade is consistently elevated, which coincides with the densest drilling in many instances.

No Measured Mineral Resources are classified at Enma. Blocks which have a slope of regression of greater than 0.7 for gold, have an average distance of less than 30 m to the informing composites, and are estimated in the first search pass support an Indicated classification. The remainder of the estimation domain is classified as an Inferred Mineral Resource.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 130

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Figure 13.33: Section Showing Enma Indicated Mineral Resource Classification**

Notes: Drill holes are coloured according to gold grade. The grade envelope is shown in pink, and the blocks classified as Indicated Mineral Resources are shown in green

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.12 Mineral Resource Statement

CIM Definition Standards for Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves (2014) defines a Mineral Resource as:

*"A Mineral Resource is a concentration or occurrence of solid material of economic interest in or on the Earth's crust in such form, grade or quality and quantity that there are reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction ("RPEEE")."*

For all the Condor projects, because the mineralization occurs relatively close to surface, the use of a pit optimisation shell is an acceptable standard approach used in industry for Mineral Resource reporting purposes to ensure that the Mineral Resource is tested for RPEEE. The Company considered future operation on Soledad and Enma using surface mining. However, at Camp and Los Cuyes SVM consider underground mining to be a preferred approach due to the steep terrain, relative complexity, high grade tabular mineralization, and that the surface infrastructure might best be located in Camp and/or Los Cuyes area.

The optimization parameters reflect a conventional open pit operation with the cost and revenue assumptions on Soledad and Enma detailed in Table 13.26 below. Note that the parameters used are not related to any mine plan or financial analysis, they were used only to define the RPEEE envelope, and the figures were derived from current information.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 131

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

The commodity prices are sourced from an independent analyst, Consensus Market Forecasts (CMF) for gold, silver, lead, and zinc. The projected outlook (in real USD) was issued by CMF in February 2025. The long-term prices were used for the consideration of the RPEEE.

**Table 13.26**: **Pit Shell Optimization Inputs for RPEEE**

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Whittle Inputs** | **Unit** | **Enma** | **Soledad** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Costs** |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Mining Cost | USD/t Material | 3 | 3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Processing Cost | USD/t ROM | 20 | 20 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;General & Admin | USD/t ROM | 12 | 12 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Average Processing Recovery Rates** |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Au | % | 75 | 90 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Ag | % | 68 | 80 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Zn | % | 0 | 0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Pb<br> **Payabi** **lity** | % | 0 | 0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Au | % | 99.5 | 99.5 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Ag | % | 99.5 | 99.5 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Zn | % |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Pb<br> **Commodity Prices** | % |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Gold | USD/oz | 2200 | 2200 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Silver | USD/oz | 27 | 27 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Zinc | USD/t Metal | 2650 | 2650 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Lead | USD/t Metal | 1950 | 1950 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Royalty** | **% of Revenue** | **3.00%** | **3.00%** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Overall Slope Angle** | **degree** | **45** | **45** |

---

Sources: CMF metal price projections, SRK benchmarks and assumptions

Notes: Pit slope angle are assumed and are not based on a geotechnical stability assessment

For the higher-grade and thicker tabular domains at Camp and Los Cuyes, there is the opportunity using a bulk mining method such as long hole open stoping for underground extraction. The thinner tabular domains at Camp and Los Cuyes require using more selective mining methods such as short hole shrinkage and/or cut and fill methods. The Company has extensive experience on selective mining methods and advised that they would like to consider a selective method as the primary approach. Therefore, a breakeven cut-off grade was calculated to determine the subset of the estimated blocks that can be economically exploited using shrinkage or cut and fill mining. For the underground mineral Resources, SRK used a Mineable Shapes Optimiser (MSO) to outline areas of the mineralization domain that have suitable continuity and grade to sustain underground mining operations. SVM intend using a highly selective mining method (shrinkage or cut and fill) for which the MSO process is not well suited. Therefore, SRK reported the underground Mineral Resources using only a cut off value and excluding small and isolated areas which are unlikely to be practically extractable.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 132

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

The input parameters associated with the cut-off grade estimates, as well as the factors used to calculate gold metal equivalent (AuEq), are presented in Table 13.27 below.

**Table 13.27: Cut-off Grade Estimates for the Condor Project**

---

| | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Cut-off grade inputs** **<sup>1</sup>** | **Unit** | **Enma** | **Soledad** | **Camp** | **Los Cuyes** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; **Costs** |  |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;UG Cost | USD/t ROM | N/A | N/A | 80 | 80 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Processing Cost | USD/t ROM | 20 | 20 | 40 | 35 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;General & Admin | USD/t ROM | 12 | 12 | 22 | 18 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Processing Recovery Rates** |  |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Au | % | 75 | 90 | 96 | 88 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Ag | % | 68 | 80 | 66 | 68 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Zn | % |  |  | 60 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Pb<br> **Weighted Average Payability** | % |  |  | 38 | 62 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Au | % | 99.5 | 99.5 | 99.5 | 99.2 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Ag | % | 99.5 | 99.5 | 90.5 | 96.3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Zn | % |  |  | 70.0 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Pb<br> **Equivalent Factor to Au** | % |  |  | 88.6 | 77.4 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Au | Factor |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Ag | Factor | 0.0111 | 0.0109 | 0.0076 | 0.0092 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Zn | Factor |  |  | 0.1643 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Pb | Factor |  |  | 0.0976 | 0.1515 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**COGs** |  |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;UG COG | g/t AuEq |  |  | 2.2 | 2.2 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;OP COG | g/t AuEq | 0.6 | 0.5 |  |  |

---

Sources: SRK Benchmarks

Notes: The commodiy prices are as the same as Whittle Input in

<sup>2</sup> The Equivalent Factor of Ag: Au= Ag price\*Ag payable \* Ag recovery / (Au price \* Au payable \* Au recovery)

<sup>3</sup> The Equivalent Factor of Pb: Au=Pb price \* Pb payable \* Pb recovery /100/ (Au price \* Au payable \* Au recovery / 31.1034768)

<sup>4</sup> The Equivalent Factor of Zn: Au=Zn price \* Zn payable \* Zn recovery /100/ (Au price \* Au payable \* Au recovery / 31.1034768)

<sup>5</sup> Open pit cut-off grade = (Processing cost + G&A)/ (Au price \* Au payable \* Au recovery \* (1-royalty)/31.1034768)

<sup>6</sup> Underground cutoff grade = (Mining cost + Processing cost + G&A) / (Au price \* Au payable \* Au recovery \* (1- royalty)/31.1034768)

The payability of Au and Ag in Camp and Los Cuyes are weighted average payable factors in both the bullion and the chargeable part in concentrates. The inputs of the payability assumptions are summarized in Table 13.28 below, and the weighted payability against processing rates are estimated in Table 13.29.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 133

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Table 13.28: Payable Assumption Inputs**

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Product** | **Element** | **Deduction grades in Product.** | **Payable after Deduction** |
| Bullion | Au |  | 99.5% |
|  | Ag |  | 99.5% |
| Pb Conc. | Pb | 3 | 95.0% |
|  | Au | 1 | 95.0% |
|  | Ag | 50 | 95.0% |
| Zn Conc. | Zn | 8 | 85.0% |
|  | Ag | 93.3 | 70.0% |

---

Sources: The Company benchmarks

**Table 13.29: Weighted Payable Estimates to Los Cuyes and Camp**

---

| | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Mine** | **Product** | **Element** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Processing Recovery** | **Grade in Conc.** | **Payable** |
| Los Cuyes | Bullion | Au | 87 |  | 99.5 |
|  |  | Ag | 49 |  | 99.5 |
|  | Pb Conc. | Au | 1 | 4 | 70.1 |
|  |  | Ag | 19 | 650 | 87.7 |
|  |  | Pb | 62 | 16 | 77.4 |
|  | Weighted Average | Au | 88 |  | 99.2 |
|  |  | Ag | 68 |  | 96.3 |
|  |  | Pb | 62 |  | 77.4 |
| Camp | Bullion | Au | 96 |  | 99.5 |
|  |  | Ag | 45 |  | 99.5 |
|  | Pb Conc. | Au | 0.1 | 3.28 | 66.0 |
|  |  | Ag | 12.3 | 3348 | 93.6 |
|  |  | Pb | 38.1 | 44.2 | 88.6 |
|  | Zn Conc. | Ag | 8.7 | 218.7 | 40.1 |
|  |  | Zn | 59.7 | 45.3 | 70.0 |
|  | Weighted Average | Au | 96 |  | 99.5 |
|  |  | Ag | 66 |  | 90.5 |
|  |  | Pb | 38 |  | 88.6 |
|  |  | Zn | 60 |  | 70.0 |

---

Sources: the Company benchmarks and SRK estimates

Within the current mining license area, as of 31 December 2024, the Condor Project, above a COG of 2.2 g/t and 2.2 g/t for Camp and Los Cuyes is amenable to underground extraction; 0.6 g/t and 0.5g/t for Enma and Soledad are amenable to open pit extraction and were constrained with a conceptual pit, designed using Whittle software. The details of the estimated Mineral Resources are shown in Table 13.30 for Mineral Resources with underground mining potential, and in Table 13.31 for Mineral Resources with open pit mining potential.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 134

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Table 13.30: Underground Extraction Mineral Resource Statement for Condor Project, as of 28 February 2025**

---

| | | | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | | **Average Grade** | **Average Grade** | **Average Grade** | **Average Grade** | **Average Grade** | **Contained Metal** | **Contained Metal** | **Contained Metal** | **Contained Metal** | **Contained Metal** |
| Deposit | Tonnes | AuEq | Au | Ag | Pb | Zn | AuEq | Au | Ag | Pb | Zn |
|  | (Mt) | (g/t) | (g/t) | (g/t) | (%) | (%) | (koz) | (koz) | (koz) | (lb'000) | (lb'000) |
| **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** |
| Camp | 2.45 | 3.44 | 3.17 | 18.68 | 0.08 | 0.73 | 271 | 250 | 1471 | 4355 | 39454 |
| Los<br> Cuyes | 0.72 | 4.04 | 3.82 | 22.9 | 0.09 | 0.63 | 93 | 88 | 528 | 1366 | 9966 |
| **Total** | **3.17** | **3.58** | **3.32** | **19.63** | **0.08** | **0.71** | **365** | **338** | **1999** | **5721** | **49420** |
| **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** |
| Camp | 7.90 | 3.38 | 3.07 | 20.59 | 0.08 | 0.89 | 859 | 780 | 5229 | 13271 | 154944 |
| Los<br> Cuyes | 4.20 | 4.71 | 4.47 | 24.64 | 0.12 | 0.53 | 636 | 603 | 3327 | 10741 | 49278 |
| **Total** | **12.1** | **3.84** | **3.55** | **22.00** | **0.09** | **0.77** | **1495** | **1383** | **8556** | **24012** | **204222** |

---

Sources: SRK 2025

Notes: Mineral resources are reported above an underground extraction economic cut off value for Camp and Los Cuyes. Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves and do not have demonstrated economic viability. All figures are rounded to reflect the relative accuracy of the estimate. The Mineral Resources are reported on a 100% basis, and not the portion attributable to SVM. The resource statement does not include mineralization in the Halo domain of the Los Cuyes, and its economic potential remains to be further investigated in future studies.

Underground Mineral Resources are reported at a cut-off grade of 2.2 g/t AuEq at Camp and Los Cuyes. Underground cut off grades have been determined using a gold price of USD/oz 2,200, silver price of USD/oz 27, zinc price of USD/t 2,650 and lead price of USD/t 1,950.

1 troy ounce = 31.1034768 metric grams.

**Table 13.31: Open Pit Mineral Resource Statement for Condor Project, as of 28 February 2025**

---

| | | | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | | **Average Grade** | **Average Grade** | **Average Grade** | **Average Grade** | **Average Grade** | **Contained Metal** | **Contained Metal** | **Contained Metal** | **Contained Metal** | **Contained Metal** |
| **Deposit** | **<u>Tonnes</u>**<br>**<u>(Mt)</u>** | **AuEq**<br>**(g/t)** | **Au**<br>**(g/t)** | **Ag**<br>**(g/t)** | **Pb**<br>**(%)** | **Zn**<br>**(%)** | **AuEq**<br>**(koz)** | **Au**<br>**(koz)** | **Ag**<br>**(koz)** | **Pb**<br>**(lb'000)** | **Zn**<br>**(lb'000)** |
| **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** | **Indicated** |
| Soledad<br> Enma | 4.03<br> 0.03 | 1.14<br> 1.05 | 1.06<br> 0.97 | 7.05<br> 7.11 | 0.05<br> 0.07 | 0.56<br> 0.30 | 148<br> 1 | 138<br> 1 | 912<br> 7 | 4365<br> 46 | 49882<br> 214 |
| **Total** | **4.06** | **1.14** | **1.06** | **7.05** | **0.05** | **0.56** | **149** | **139** | **920** | **4411** | **50097** |
| **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** | **Inferred** |
| Soledad<br> Enma | 14.15<br> 0.02 | 0.83<br> 0.74 | 0.76<br> 0.56 | 5.86<br> 16.07 | 0.04<br> 0.06 | 0.51<br> 0.20 | 375<br> 1 | 346<br> 0 | 2664<br> 12 | 12819<br> 33 | 158009<br> 103 |
| **Total** | **14.17** | **0.82** | **0.76** | **5.87** | **0.04** | **0.51** | **376** | **347** | **2676** | **12851** | **158112** |

---

Appendix ASources: SRK 2025

Notes: Mineral resources are reported in relation to a conceptual pit shell for Soledad and Enma. Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves and do not have demonstrated economic viability. All figures are rounded to reflect the relative accuracy of the estimate. The Mineral Resources are reported on a 100% basis, and not the portion attributable to SVM.

Open pit Mineral Resources are reported at a cut-off grade of 0.6 g/t AuEq for Enma and 0.5 g/t AuEq for Soledad. Open pit optimizations have been determined using a gold price of USD/oz 2,200, silver price of USD/oz 27, zinc price of USD/t 2,650 and lead price of USD/t 1,950.

1 troy ounce = 31.1034768 metric grams.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 135

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.13 Grade Sensitivity Analysis

Mineral Resources are sensitive to the selection of COGs. To illustrate this sensitivity, ore quantities and grade estimates at different COGs are presented in Table 13.32 to Table 13.35. The reader is cautioned that the figures presented in this table should not be mistaken for a Mineral Resource Statement. The figures are only presented to show the sensitivity of the block model estimates to the selection of COG. Figure 13.34 to Figure 13.37 represent this sensitivity as grade-tonnage curves.

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| **Table** | **13.32:** | **Global Block Model Quantities and Grade Estimates for Indicated and Inferred Category, Camp at Various cut-off Grades** |

---

---

| | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp; **Cut off**<br> **(AuEq g/t)** | **Tonnes**<br> **Mt** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **AuEq**<br> **g/t** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; **Au**<br> **g/t** | **Ag**<br> **g/t** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; **Pb%** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; **Zn%** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;0 | 41.01 | 1.74 | 1.55 | 12.90 | 0.05 | 0.55 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;0.10 | 39.19 | 1.82 | 1.62 | 13.44 | 0.05 | 0.57 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;0.20 | 38.16 | 1.86 | 1.66 | 13.73 | 0.05 | 0.59 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;0.30 | 37.30 | 1.90 | 1.69 | 13.94 | 0.05 | 0.60 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;0.40 | 36.70 | 1.92 | 1.71 | 14.09 | 0.05 | 0.60 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;0.50 | 36.06 | 1.95 | 1.74 | 14.24 | 0.05 | 0.61 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;0.60 | 35.20 | 1.98 | 1.77 | 14.46 | 0.05 | 0.62 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;0.70 | 34.22 | 2.02 | 1.80 | 14.68 | 0.05 | 0.63 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;0.80 | 33.07 | 2.07 | 1.84 | 14.93 | 0.06 | 0.64 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;0.90 | 31.75 | 2.12 | 1.89 | 15.21 | 0.06 | 0.65 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;1.00 | 30.21 | 2.18 | 1.94 | 15.50 | 0.06 | 0.67 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;1.10 | 28.46 | 2.25 | 2.01 | 15.83 | 0.06 | 0.68 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;1.20 | 26.54 | 2.33 | 2.08 | 16.21 | 0.06 | 0.70 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;1.30 | 24.60 | 2.41 | 2.16 | 16.57 | 0.06 | 0.72 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;1.40 | 22.58 | 2.51 | 2.25 | 16.99 | 0.06 | 0.74 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;1.50 | 20.61 | 2.61 | 2.34 | 17.38 | 0.06 | 0.75 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;1.60 | 18.79 | 2.71 | 2.44 | 17.71 | 0.07 | 0.77 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;1.70 | 17.01 | 2.82 | 2.55 | 18.16 | 0.07 | 0.79 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;1.80 | 15.25 | 2.94 | 2.66 | 18.59 | 0.07 | 0.80 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;1.90 | 13.89 | 3.05 | 2.77 | 19.05 | 0.07 | 0.81 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2.00 | 12.60 | 3.16 | 2.87 | 19.43 | 0.07 | 0.83 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2.10 | 11.46 | 3.27 | 2.98 | 19.92 | 0.08 | 0.84 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2.20 | 10.34 | 3.40 | 3.10 | 20.14 | 0.08 | 0.85 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2.30 | 9.42 | 3.51 | 3.20 | 20.56 | 0.08 | 0.86 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2.40 | 8.57 | 3.62 | 3.31 | 20.97 | 0.08 | 0.88 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2.50 | 7.75 | 3.75 | 3.43 | 21.51 | 0.08 | 0.89 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2.60 | 7.03 | 3.87 | 3.54 | 22.10 | 0.08 | 0.89 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2.70 | 6.43 | 3.98 | 3.65 | 22.66 | 0.09 | 0.91 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2.80 | 5.91 | 4.09 | 3.75 | 23.07 | 0.09 | 0.92 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2.90 | 5.46 | 4.19 | 3.85 | 23.55 | 0.09 | 0.93 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;3.00 | 5.00 | 4.31 | 3.96 | 24.11 | 0.09 | 0.95 |

---

Notes: The reader is cautioned that the figures in this table should not be misconstrued with a Mineral Resource Statement. The figures are only presented to show the sensitivity of the block model estimates to the selection of cut-off grade. The tonnes reported in this tabulation are not limited by the reasonable prospects of eventual economic extraction that must be applied to a Mineral Resource

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 136

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Figure 13.34: Camp Deposit Global Grade Tonnage Curve**

Notes: The reader is cautioned that the figures in this chart should not be misconstrued with a Mineral Resource Statement. The figures are only presented to show the sensitivity of the block model estimates to the selection of cut-off grade. The tonnes reported in this chart are not limited by the reasonable prospects of eventual economic extraction that must be applied to a Mineral Resource.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 137

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

Table 13.33: Global Block Model Quantities and Grade Estimates for Indicated and Inferred Category, Los Cuyes at Various cut-off Grades

---

| | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Cut off**<br> **(AuEq g/t)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Tonnes**<br> **Mt** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**AuEq**<br> **g/t** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Au**<br> **g/t** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Ag**<br> **g/t** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Pb%** | **Zn%** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;0 | 62.3 | 1.1 | 1.07 | 7.39 | 0.03 | 0.26 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;0.1 | 62.3 | 1.1 | 1.07 | 7.39 | 0.03 | 0.26 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;0.2 | 62.3 | 1.1 | 1.07 | 7.39 | 0.03 | 0.26 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;0.3 | 61.9 | 1.1 | 1.07 | 7.42 | 0.03 | 0.26 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;0.4 | 60.1 | 1.2 | 1.10 | 7.54 | 0.03 | 0.26 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;0.5 | 55.4 | 1.2 | 1.15 | 7.83 | 0.04 | 0.27 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;0.6 | 47.7 | 1.3 | 1.26 | 8.33 | 0.04 | 0.27 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;0.7 | 38.5 | 1.5 | 1.42 | 9.05 | 0.04 | 0.29 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;0.8 | 30.3 | 1.7 | 1.61 | 9.93 | 0.05 | 0.30 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;0.9 | 23.8 | 1.9 | 1.84 | 10.99 | 0.05 | 0.32 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;1 | 19 | 2.2 | 2.08 | 12.05 | 0.06 | 0.35 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;1.1 | 15.7 | 2.4 | 2.31 | 13.14 | 0.06 | 0.37 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;1.2 | 13.1 | 2.7 | 2.55 | 14.28 | 0.07 | 0.40 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;1.3 | 11.2 | 2.9 | 2.79 | 15.47 | 0.07 | 0.42 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;1.4 | 9.7 | 3.2 | 3.02 | 16.74 | 0.08 | 0.45 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;1.5 | 8.6 | 3.4 | 3.24 | 17.95 | 0.08 | 0.46 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;1.6 | 7.7 | 3.6 | 3.43 | 19.02 | 0.09 | 0.48 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;1.7 | 7 | 3.8 | 3.63 | 20.14 | 0.09 | 0.49 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;1.8 | 6.4 | 4 | 3.80 | 21.04 | 0.10 | 0.50 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;1.9 | 6.1 | 4.1 | 3.93 | 21.71 | 0.10 | 0.51 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2 | 5.7 | 4.3 | 4.05 | 22.36 | 0.10 | 0.51 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2.1 | 5.4 | 4.4 | 4.16 | 22.99 | 0.11 | 0.52 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2.2 | 5.1 | 4.5 | 4.30 | 23.77 | 0.11 | 0.53 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2.3 | 4.8 | 4.7 | 4.44 | 24.49 | 0.11 | 0.55 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2.4 | 4.6 | 4.8 | 4.56 | 25.15 | 0.12 | 0.56 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2.5 | 4.4 | 4.9 | 4.66 | 25.53 | 0.12 | 0.57 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2.6 | 4.1 | 5 | 4.78 | 26.05 | 0.12 | 0.58 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2.7 | 3.9 | 5.2 | 4.91 | 26.58 | 0.13 | 0.59 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2.8 | 3.8 | 5.3 | 5.00 | 26.88 | 0.13 | 0.59 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2.9 | 3.6 | 5.4 | 5.10 | 27.27 | 0.13 | 0.60 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;3 | 3.5 | 5.5 | 5.20 | 27.75 | 0.13 | 0.61 |

---

Notes: The reader is cautioned that the figures in this table should not be misconstrued with a Mineral Resource Statement. The figures are only presented to show the sensitivity of the block model estimates to the selection of cut-off grade. The tonnes reported in this tabulation are not limited by the reasonable prospects of eventual economic extraction that must be applied to a Mineral Resource.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 138

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Figure 13.35: Los Cuyes Deposit Global Grade Tonnage Curve**

![](ex99-1_082.jpg)

Notes: The reader is cautioned that the figures in this chart should not be misconstrued with a Mineral Resource Statement. The figures are only presented to show the sensitivity of the block model estimates to the selection of cut-off grade. The tonnes reported in this chart are not limited by the reasonable prospects of eventual economic extraction that must be applied to a Mineral Resource.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 139

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

Table 13.34: Global Block Model Quantities and Grade Estimates for Indicated and Inferred Category, Soledad at Various cut-off Grades

---

| | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp; **Cut off**<br> **(AuEq g/t)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; **Tonnes**<br> **Mt** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; **AuEq**<br> **g/t** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Au**<br> **g/t** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Ag**<br> **g/t** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; **Pb%** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; **Zn%** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;0 | 47.6 | 0.63 | 0.56 | 6.70 | 0.04 | 0.41 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;0.1 | 47.6 | 0.63 | 0.56 | 6.70 | 0.04 | 0.41 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;0.2 | 47.5 | 0.63 | 0.56 | 6.71 | 0.04 | 0.41 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;0.3 | 45 | 0.65 | 0.58 | 6.90 | 0.04 | 0.42 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;0.4 | 35.5 | 0.73 | 0.65 | 7.51 | 0.05 | 0.45 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;0.5 | 27 | 0.82 | 0.74 | 7.94 | 0.05 | 0.48 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;0.6 | 19.4 | 0.93 | 0.84 | 8.23 | 0.05 | 0.52 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;0.7 | 13.8 | 1.04 | 0.95 | 8.31 | 0.06 | 0.55 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;0.8 | 10 | 1.16 | 1.07 | 7.98 | 0.06 | 0.58 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;0.9 | 7.3 | 1.27 | 1.19 | 7.73 | 0.06 | 0.60 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;1 | 5.4 | 1.38 | 1.30 | 7.60 | 0.06 | 0.62 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;1.1 | 4.1 | 1.49 | 1.40 | 7.96 | 0.06 | 0.64 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;1.2 | 3 | 1.62 | 1.53 | 8.13 | 0.07 | 0.66 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;1.3 | 2.3 | 1.74 | 1.64 | 8.46 | 0.07 | 0.67 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;1.4 | 1.7 | 1.86 | 1.77 | 8.61 | 0.07 | 0.65 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;1.5 | 1.4 | 1.98 | 1.89 | 8.36 | 0.07 | 0.62 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;1.6 | 0.9 | 2.17 | 2.08 | 8.28 | 0.06 | 0.60 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;1.7 | 0.7 | 2.34 | 2.25 | 8.25 | 0.06 | 0.57 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;1.8 | 0.6 | 2.50 | 2.41 | 8.03 | 0.05 | 0.54 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;1.9 | 0.5 | 2.62 | 2.53 | 8.33 | 0.05 | 0.56 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2 | 0.3 | 2.87 | 2.79 | 7.18 | 0.05 | 0.56 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2.1 | 0.3 | 3.12 | 3.05 | 6.71 | 0.03 | 0.51 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2.2 | 0.2 | 3.21 | 3.15 | 6.23 | 0.03 | 0.49 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2.3 | 0.2 | 3.29 | 3.22 | 6.22 | 0.03 | 0.48 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2.4 | 0.2 | 3.45 | 3.39 | 5.85 | 0.02 | 0.46 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2.5 | 0.2 | 3.60 | 3.54 | 5.15 | 0.01 | 0.43 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2.6 | 0.1 | 3.85 | 3.79 | 5.72 | 0.01 | 0.45 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2.7 | 0.1 | 3.85 | 3.79 | 5.72 | 0.01 | 0.45 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2.8 | 0.1 | 4.20 | 4.14 | 5.77 | 0.01 | 0.43 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2.9 | 0.1 | 4.49 | 4.43 | 6.02 | 0.01 | 0.44 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;3 | 0.1 | 4.71 | 4.65 | 5.74 | 0.01 | 0.42 |

---

Notes: The reader is cautioned that the figures in this table should not be misconstrued with a Mineral Resource Statement. The figures are only presented to show the sensitivity of the block model estimates to the selection of cut-off grade. The tonnes reported in this tabulation are not limited by the reasonable prospects of eventual economic extraction that must be applied to a Mineral Resource.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 140

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Figure 13.36: Soledad Deposit Global Grade Tonnage Curve**

![](ex99-1_083.jpg)

Notes: The reader is cautioned that the figures in this chart should not be misconstrued with a Mineral Resource Statement. The figures are only presented to show the sensitivity of the block model estimates to the selection of cut-off grade. The tonnes reported in this chart are not limited by the reasonable prospects of eventual economic extraction that must be applied to a Mineral Resource.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 141

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

Table 13.35: Global Block Model Quantities and Grade Estimates for Indicated and Inferred Category, Enma at Various cut-off Grades

---

| | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Cut off**<br> **(AuEq g/t)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Tonnes**<br> **Mt** | **AuEq<br> g/t** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Au**<br> **g/t** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Ag**<br> **g/t** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Pb%** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Zn%** |
| 0 | 3.33 | 0.79 | 0.64 | 13.24 | 0.07 | 0.30 |
| 0.10 | 3.33 | 0.79 | 0.64 | 13.24 | 0.07 | 0.30 |
| 0.20 | 3.30 | 0.80 | 0.65 | 13.33 | 0.07 | 0.30 |
| 0.30 | 3.06 | 0.84 | 0.68 | 14.01 | 0.07 | 0.32 |
| 0.40 | 2.57 | 0.93 | 0.76 | 15.23 | 0.07 | 0.33 |
| 0.50 | 1.96 | 1.08 | 0.89 | 17.05 | 0.08 | 0.35 |
| 0.60 | 1.54 | 1.23 | 1.02 | 18.74 | 0.08 | 0.36 |
| 0.70 | 1.16 | 1.41 | 1.18 | 20.65 | 0.09 | 0.39 |
| 0.80 | 0.95 | 1.57 | 1.32 | 22.01 | 0.09 | 0.41 |
| 0.90 | 0.83 | 1.66 | 1.41 | 23.10 | 0.10 | 0.42 |
| 1.00 | 0.73 | 1.77 | 1.50 | 24.45 | 0.10 | 0.43 |
| 1.10 | 0.64 | 1.86 | 1.58 | 25.22 | 0.10 | 0.44 |
| 1.20 | 0.55 | 1.98 | 1.69 | 26.20 | 0.11 | 0.45 |
| 1.30 | 0.49 | 2.08 | 1.78 | 27.26 | 0.11 | 0.46 |
| 1.40 | 0.43 | 2.18 | 1.87 | 28.21 | 0.11 | 0.46 |
| 1.50 | 0.39 | 2.25 | 1.93 | 28.91 | 0.11 | 0.46 |
| 1.60 | 0.35 | 2.34 | 2.01 | 29.98 | 0.11 | 0.47 |
| 1.70 | 0.30 | 2.45 | 2.11 | 31.14 | 0.12 | 0.48 |
| 1.80 | 0.27 | 2.53 | 2.18 | 31.83 | 0.12 | 0.49 |
| 1.90 | 0.24 | 2.61 | 2.25 | 32.37 | 0.12 | 0.49 |
| 2.00 | 0.21 | 2.69 | 2.32 | 33.59 | 0.12 | 0.46 |
| 2.10 | 0.19 | 2.76 | 2.38 | 34.07 | 0.12 | 0.46 |
| 2.20 | 0.17 | 2.85 | 2.46 | 35.06 | 0.11 | 0.46 |
| 2.30 | 0.15 | 2.90 | 2.51 | 35.45 | 0.12 | 0.47 |
| 2.40 | 0.13 | 2.99 | 2.59 | 35.74 | 0.11 | 0.45 |
| 2.50 | 0.11 | 3.11 | 2.71 | 36.59 | 0.12 | 0.45 |
| 2.60 | 0.11 | 3.13 | 2.72 | 36.87 | 0.11 | 0.45 |
| 2.70 | 0.08 | 3.30 | 2.87 | 38.26 | 0.12 | 0.46 |
| 2.80 | 0.06 | 3.41 | 2.97 | 39.34 | 0.13 | 0.49 |
| 2.90 | 0.05 | 3.54 | 3.09 | 40.69 | 0.12 | 0.47 |
| 3.00 | 0.04 | 3.68 | 3.20 | 43.31 | 0.11 | 0.42 |

---

Notes: The reader is cautioned that the figures in this table should not be misconstrued with a Mineral Resource Statement. The figures are only presented to show the sensitivity of the block model estimates to the selection of cut-off grade. The tonnes reported in this tabulation are not limited by the reasonable prospects of eventual economic extraction that must be applied to a Mineral Resource

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 142

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Figure 13.37: Enma Deposit Global Grade Tonnage Curve**

Notes: The reader is cautioned that the figures in this chart should not be misconstrued with a Mineral Resource Statement. The figures are only presented to show the sensitivity of the block model estimates to the selection of cut-off grade. The tonnes reported in this chart are not limited by the reasonable prospects of eventual economic extraction that must be applied to a Mineral Resource.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.14 Previous Mineral Resource Estimate

MTB Enterprises Inc. was requested by Luminex Resource to complete a NI 43-101 compliant Mineral Resource estimation for the Condor project in 2021, including a Preliminary Economic Assessment (PEA) for the Condor North area that includes Los Cuyes, Soledad, Enma and Camp deposits.

The last Mineral Resource was reported above cut-offs detailed in the notes below to reflect open pit mining for Los Cuyes, Soledad, and Enma, and underground mining for the RPEEE criteria under the CIM Definition Standards. The results of the estimation are shown in Table 13.36.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 143

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

Table 13.36: Previous Condor Project Mineral Resources for selected projects Effective 28 July 2021

---

| | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | | | **Average Grade** | **Average Grade** | | **Contained Metal** | **Contained Metal** |
| <br>&nbsp;&nbsp;**Deposit** | **Tonnes**<br>**(Mt)** | <br>**AuEq**<br> **(g/t)** | **Au**<br> **(g/t)** | **Ag**<br> **(g/t)** | <br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; **AuEq**<br> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**(koz)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; **Au**<br> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**(koz)** | **Ag**<br> **(Moz)** |
|  |  |  | **Indicated** |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Los Cuyes | 50.8 | 0.71 | 0.65 | 5.2 | 1161 | 1059 | 8.5 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Soledad | 19.4 | 0.68 | 0.63 | 4.8 | 426 | 390 | 3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Enma | 0.66 | 0.78 | 0.64 | 11.6 | 17 | 14 | 0.25 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**All** | **70.9** | **0.70** | **0.64** | **5.2** | **1604** | **1463** | **11.8** |
|  |  |  | **Inferred** |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Los Cuyes | 36.4 | 0.65 | 0.59 | 5.3 | 761 | 687 | 6.2 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Soledad | 15.1 | 0.5 | 0.46 | 3.4 | 245 | 225 | 1.7 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Enma | 0.07 | 0.93 | 0.81 | 9.7 | 2 | 2 | 0.02 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Camp | 6 | 3.45 | 3.28 | 27.8 | 663 | 631 | 5.3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**All** | **57.6** | **0.90** | **0.83** | **7.1** | **1671** | **1545** | **13.2** |

---

Sources: MBT 2021

Notes: Mineral resources exhibit reasonable prospects of eventual economic extraction using open pit extraction methods at Los Cuyes, Soledad and Enma and using underground mining methods at the Camp deposit. At Los Cuyes and Soledad, the base case cut-off grade is 0.30 g/t AuEq and at Enma, the base case cut-off grade is 0.37 g/t AuEq. At Los Cuyes, Soledad, and Enma, AuEq = Au g/t + (Ag g/t × 0.012). The base case cutoff grade for the Camp resource is 1.33 g/t AuEq, where AuEq = Au g/t + (Ag g/t x 0.0062).

Mineral resources that are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.

The major changes to the Mineral Resource between 2021 and 2024 include:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ The additional data from Camp and Los Cuyes from the 2022
and 2023 exploration.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ The wireframes of Camp
and Los Cuyes were updated based on the new data and the interpretation of the mineralization.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ The grade shells of Soledad and Enma were updated.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ The Mineral Resource of Los Cuyes was planned as an open pit
operation in 2021 PEA but this has switched to Underground mining in this estimate.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■ RPEEE assumptions (different
commodity prices and recoveries) as well as changes in the reported cut-offs.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 144

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **14** | **Adjacent Properties** |

---

There are a number of other mineral occurrences in the Zamora copper-gold metallogenic belt, including deposits in the Condor Central and Condor South areas owned by SVM. The notable SVM deposits are shown in Figure 6.2 and include the Chinapintza epithermal gold veins immediately to the north of Los Cuyes, which extends beyond the Condor project mining concessions onto the adjacent Jerusalem Concession (Figure 14.1). To the south on the SVM concessions are known occurrences at Prometedor, El Hito, Santa Barbara and Nayumbi (Figure 6.2).

**Figure 14.1: Plan Map – Chinapintza Veins – Jerusalem Concession**

![](ex99-1_085.jpg)

Sources: Ronning, 2003; Luminex, 2018, Luminex 2021

Luminex 2021 reports that TVX did an extensive amount of exploration work on the Jerusalem claim, including diamond drilling (35 holes; 9,338.1 m), trenching and underground development and sampling. In 1996, it calculated a historical Mineral Resource for this zone of 535,828 tonnes grading 12.5 g/t Au, 66.4 g/t Ag, 0.07% Cu, 0.76% Pb, 3.57% Zn (Ronning, 2003). This historical Mineral Resource estimate is detailed in the NI 43-101 Technical Report entitled "Review of the Jerusalem Project, Ecuador" with an effective date of May 30, 2003, and is available on SEDAR.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 145

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

In 2004, Maynard (2004) provided an updated historical Mineral Resource estimate for the veins on the Jerusalem concession (Table 14.1). This historical Mineral Resource estimate is detailed in the NI 43-101 Technical Report entitled "Independent Geological Evaluation, Jerusalem Project, Zamora Chinchipe, Ecuador for Dynasty Metals & Mining Inc." with an effective date of October 29, 2004 and is available on SEDAR. The QP has been unable to verify this Mineral Resource estimate, and it is not necessarily indicative of mineralization on the Condor North Project.

**Table 14.1: Maynard (2004) Jeruslem Concession Mineral Resources**

---

| | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Category** | **Tonnes** | **Au**<br> **(g/t)** | **Ag**<br> **(g/t)** | **Cu**<br> **(ppm)** | **Pb** <br> **(ppm)** | **Zn** <br> **(ppm)** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Measured | 298900 | 13.9 | 102 | 576 | 563 | 26859 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Indicated | 722500 | 12.8 | 98 | 360 | 3560 | 17660 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Inferred | 1785200 | 11.6 | 103 | 424 | 3887 | 18397 |

---

Sources: Maynard, 2004

Notes: These have not been reviewed by SRK

The authors of this report have not completed sufficient work to verify the historical Mineral Resource on the Jerusalem concession and this information is not necessarily indicative of mineralization on the Condor North area.

In 2021 Luminex reported a Mineral Resource for the Santa Barbara deposit. Santa Barbara is a gold- copper porphyry hosted in alkali basalts of unknown age. These are intruded by diorite and surrounded by the Zamora Batholith. These host units are capped by a veneer of conglomerates of the Chapiza Formation and in turn overlain by quartz arenites of the Hollín Formation. The Luminex Mineral Resource estimate for Santa Barbara is shown in Table 14.2. The QP has not reviewed the Santa Barabara Mineral Resources.

**Table 14.2: Luminex (2021) Mineral Resource estimate for the Santa Barbara Deposit**

---

| | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | | | **Average Grade** | **Average Grade** | | **Contained Metal** | **Contained Metal** |
| <br>&nbsp;&nbsp;**Class** | **Tonnes**<br>**(Mt)** | <br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; **AuEq**<br> **(g/t)** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Au**<br> **(g/t)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; **Ag**<br> **(g/t)** | <br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; **AuEq**<br> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**(koz)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; **Au**<br> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**(koz)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; **Ag**<br> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**(Moz)** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Indicated | 39.8 | 0.83 | 0.67 | 0.8 | 1057 | 859 | 1 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Inferred | 166.7 | 0.66 | 0.52 | 0.9 | 3534 | 2768 | 4.9 |

---

Sources: Luminex, 2021

Note: Mineral resources exhibit reasonable prospects of eventual economic extraction using open pit extraction methods. The base case cut-off grade is 0.37 g/t AuEq where: AuEq = Au g/t + (Ag g/t × 0.012) + (Cu% x 1.371)

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 146

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **15** | **Other Relevant Data and Information** |

---

The QP is not aware of any other relevant data that would affect the opinions stated in this report.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 147

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

16 Interpretation and Conclusions

SVM has undertaken a review, re-logging, and remodelling of the mineralization at the Condor Project. At the Los Cuyes and Camp deposits the updated model of mineralization has included identification of several high-grade tabular domains which are potentially amenable to extraction using underground mining methods. At Soledad, Enma and outside of the high-grade domains at Los Cuyes SVM have modelled a lower grade disseminated mineralization which has the potential for extraction using an open pit mining method.

This mineralization interpretation at Los Cuyes is a change from the previous model which only considered a disseminated mineralization style, and did not isolate the high-grade zones separately. For some domains at Los Cuyes (such as the LCW domain) the data strongly support the revised interpretation, with good continuity in the mineralization observed over the project area. While for other domains, the continuity is less clear, and the quantity of data supporting these is less. Resulting in lower confidence in these interpretations. The lateral extents of some of the domains are based on wider spaced drilling which naturally carries some additional risk to the confidence in the interpretation of the domain continuity.

At Camp, the previous models relied on interpolated domain definition using indicators, and the current interpretation is supported by a more geologically rigorous interpretation using a combination of the grade and geological logs to link up intersections between drill holes into more coherent and continuous domains.

The geological interpretation at Soledad and Enma is not as well developed as that of Los Cuyes and Camp, relying on grade shells to constrain the mineralization. At Soledad, there is sufficient dense sampling in several locations to confirm the continuity of the mineralization despite the lower understanding of the mineralization controls, and SRK considers this sufficient to support an Indicated Mineral Resource classification.

For all the deposits, the metallurgical test work indicated that there are reasonable prospects for achieving the recoveries applied to the economic assessment. However, further work is required to be able to confirm the optimal processing configuration for each style of mineralization. As such, there is a risk that these recovery factors may change with additional test work and depending on the ultimate processing flow sheet that is selected if the project is developed.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 148

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

17 Recommendations

To confirm the interpretation of the high-grade domains at Camp and Los Cuyes SRK recommends a phased exploration program should be undertaken. SVM has planned an initial two-phase exploration program of surface drilling as summarised in Table 17.1. The initial phase plans for drilling six holes at Los Cuyes with an average length of approximately 400 m for a total of 2,470 m, and a second phase drilling four holes split between Los Cuyes and Camp totalling 1,030 m.

**Table 17.1: Proposed Initial Exploration Program for the Condor Project**

---

| | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Phase** | **Deposit** | **No Holes** | **Meters** | **Cost (US$** |
| Phase 1 | Los Cuyes | 6 | 2470 |  |
| Phase 2 | Los Cuyes | 2 | 510 |  |
|  | Camp | 2 | 520 |  |
| **Total** |  | **10** | **3500** | **$730000** |
| Sources: SVM |  |  |  |  |

---

Pending the approval of an environmental permit which is in progress at present, SVM plans to develop underground access drives to intersect the mineralization, and to provide platforms for drilling which will allow for better targeted drilling of shorter holes from the underground development. SVM has not yet developed a detailed development and drilling plant, as this is contingent on the outcomes of the initial surface drilling results and the approval of the environmental permit applications.

SRK recommends that the two processes of "bulk flotation – bulk concentrate cyanidation - cyaniding residue separation flotation " and "cyanidation - cyaniding residue flotation" should be tested in detail, and the trade-off study between the two processes should be conducted according to the final test results.

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 149

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**References**

CIM, 2014. Definition Standards for Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves (May 2014).

CIM, 2019 Estimation of Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves Best Practices Guidelines (November 29, 2019)

C.H. Plenge & C.I.A. S.A. of Lima, Peru, May 26, 2021, Report of Investigation No.18525-73-89, Progress Report, Luminex Condor North Project, Camp, Los Cuyes, Enma Samples, Zamora Province, Southeast Ecuador

Drobe, J.L. Stein, D. Gabites, J., 2013. Geology, Mineralization and Geochronological Constraints of the Mirador Cu-Au Porphyry District, Southeast Ecuador. Economic Geology, v. 108, pp. 11–35.

Elfen, S., Davis, B.M., Michel, R.S., King, N. K., Sim, R., McNaughton, J. S. C. Marek, J. M., Barber, J. C., Norrish, N. I., Hathaway, L., 2021: Preliminary Economic Assessment Zamora-Chinchipe, Ecuador, Prepared for Luminex Resources

Goldmarca Mining Peru S.A.C, May 2004, Breccias -Sanjose-Ecuador Direct Cyaniding Metallurgical Testwork

Hathaway, L, (Undated) Adventus - Advanced Projects and Exploration Assets - Ecuador

Hedenquist, J.W., Izawa, E., Arribas, A., Jr., and White, N.C., 1996. Epithermal gold deposits: Styles, characteristics, and exploration: Resource Geology Special Publication 1, p. 17.

Independent Metallurgical Laboratories Pty Ltd., May 2006, San Jose Ore Evaluation Testwork, Condor Gold Project for Goldmarca Limited Lumina Gold Corp (Authors not listed), 2017: Guide for Exploration Operations Preliminary Draft Rev. 0

Luminex Internal Report (Authors not listed), 2020: March-2020 QAQC Camp Area

Maynard, A., Jones, P.A. 2011. NI 43-101 Technical Report (revised) on the Condor Gold Project located in Zamora, Ecuador. p. 124.

Plenge Laboratory, July 24, 2020, Report of Investigation No.18525 (Base Camp Samples Progress Report)

Plenge Laboratory, August 29, 2023, Report of Investigation No.18702 (Condor Project, Los Cuyes (High Grade, Low Grade), Breccia Pipe)

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 150

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**Appendix**

**Qualified Persons Certificates**

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025 151

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**CERTIFICATE OF QUALIFIED PERSON**

To Accompany the report entitled: **Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador**, **May 12, 2025**.

I, Mark Wanless, residing at 47 Ball Crescent, Whitby, ON, Canada do hereby certify that:

1) I am a Principal Geologist with the firm of SRK Consulting (Canada) Inc. (SRK) with an office at Suite 1500 – 155 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, Canada;

2) I am a graduate of the University of Cape Town with a BSc (Hons) in Geology in 1995. I have practiced my profession continuously since 1996. During the past 28 years, I have undertaken numerous Mineral Resource estimates and audits for gold and multi commodity projects and operating mines in several countries across five continents;

3) I am a professional Geoscientist registered with the South African Council for Natural Scientific Professionals (Registration No 400178/05). I am a Fellow of the Geological Society of South African and a Member of the Geostatistical Association of South Africa and a Member of the South African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy;

4) I have personally inspected the subject project June 19-20, 2024;

5) I have read the definition of Qualified Person set out in National Instrument 43-101 and certify that by virtue of my education, affiliation to a professional association, and past relevant work experience, I fulfill the requirements to be a Qualified Person for the purposes of National Instrument 43-101 and this technical report has been prepared in compliance with National Instrument 43-101 and Form 43-101F1;

6) I, as a Qualified Person, I am independent of the issuer as defined in Section 1.5 of National Instrument 43-101;

7) I am the co-author of this report and responsible for sections 1 to 11 and 12 to 18 and accept professional responsibility for those sections of this technical report;

8) I have had no prior involvement with the subject property;

9) I have read National Instrument 43-101 and confirm that this technical report has been prepared in compliance therewith;

10) SRK Consulting (Canada) Inc. was retained by Silvercorp Metals Inc. to prepare a technical audit of the Condor Project. In conducting our audit, a gap analysis of project technical data was completed using CIM *Estimation of Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves Best Practice Guidelines* and Canadian Securities Administrators National Instrument 43-101 guidelines. The preceding report is based on a site visit, a review of project files and discussions with Silvercorp Metals Inc. personnel;

11) I have not received, nor do I expect to receive, any interest, directly or indirectly, in the Condor Project or securities of Silvercorp Metals Inc.; and

12) That, as of the date of this certificate, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief, this technical report contains all scientific and technical information that is required to be disclosed to make the technical report not misleading.

*<u>["signed and sealed"]</u>* <br> Toronto Mark Wanless, PrSciNat <br> May 12, 2025 Principal Geologist

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**CERTIFICATE OF QUALIFIED PERSON**

To Accompany the report entitled: **Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador**, **May 12, 2025**.

I, Falong Hu, residing at B1301 COFCO Plaza, 8 Jianguomennei Dajie, Beijing, the People's Republic of China, do hereby certify that:

1) I am a Principal Mining Engineer with the firm of SRK Consulting (China) Ltd. (SRK) with an office at B1301 COFCO Plaza, 8 Jianguomennei Dajie, Beijing, China;

2) I am a graduate of the Central South University with a bachelor's degree in mining engineering in 2009. I have practiced my profession continuously since 2009. During the past 16 years, I have undertaken numerous mining studies, Mineral (Ore) Reserve estimates and audits, and supports on Reasonable Prospects for Eventual Economic Extraction ("RPEEE") during Mineral Resource estimates, for gold and multi commodity projects and operating mines in several countries;

3) I am a Fellow of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy ("FAusIMM"), (#313608), and in a good standing;

4) I have personally inspected the subject project June 19-20, 2024;

5) I have read the definition of Qualified Person set out in National Instrument 43-101 and certify that by virtue of my education, affiliation to a professional association, and past relevant work experience, I fulfill the requirements to be a Qualified Person for the purposes of National Instrument 43-101 and this technical report has been prepared in compliance with National Instrument 43-101 and Form 43-101F1;

6) I am independent of the issuer as defined in Section 1.5 of National Instrument 43-101;

7) I am the co-author of this report and responsible for the RPEEE and cut-off grade(s) ("COGs") parts of sections 13.12 accept professional responsibility for those part of this technical report;

8) I have had no prior involvement with the subject property;

9) I have read National Instrument 43-101 and confirm that this technical report has been prepared in compliance therewith;

10) SRK Consulting (Canada) Inc. was retained by Silvercorp Metals Inc. to prepare a technical audit of the Condor Project. In conducting our audit, a gap analysis of project technical data was completed using CIM *Estimation of Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves Best Practice Guidelines* and Canadian Securities Administrators National Instrument 43-101 guidelines. The preceding report is based on a site visit, a review of project files and discussions with Silvercorp Metals Inc. personnel;

11) I have not received, nor do I expect to receive, any interest, directly or indirectly, in the Condor Project or securities of Silvercorp Metals Inc.; and

12) That, as of the date of this certificate, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief, this technical report contains all scientific and technical information that is required to be disclosed to make the technical report not misleading.

*<u>["signed and sealed"]</u>* <br> Beijing Falong Hu, FAusIMM <br> May 12, 2025 Principal Mining Engineer

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025

CAPR003605 ■ Silvercorp Metals Inc. <br> <u>Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador</u>

**CERTIFICATE OF QUALIFIED PERSON**

To Accompany the report entitled: **Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador**, **May 12, 2025**.

I, Lanliang Niu, residing at B1301 COFCO Plaza, 8 Jianguomennei Dajie, Beijing, the People's Republic of China, do hereby certify that:

1) I am a Principal Mineral Processing Engineer, worked for SRK Consulting China Ltd. ("SRK CN") with an office at: B1301 COFCO Plaza, 8 Jianguomennei Dajie, Beijing, the People's Republic of China ("PRC" or "China");

2) I graduated with a bachelor's degree in mineral processing from Beijing University of Iron and Steel Technology in 1987. I have practiced my profession as a Mineral Processing Engineer for a total of 37 years since my graduation and have worked at SRK CN for 17 years as a Mineral Processing Consultant.

3) I am a member of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy ("MAusIMM"), (#313608), and a member of China Association of Mineral Resources Appraisers ("CAMRA");

4) I have not personally inspected the subject project;

5) I have read the definition of Qualified Person set out in National Instrument 43-101 and certify that by virtue of my education, affiliation to a professional association, and past relevant work experience, I fulfill the requirements to be a Qualified Person for the purposes of National Instrument 43-101 and this technical report has been prepared in compliance with National Instrument 43-101 and Form 43-101F1;

6) I am independent of the issuer as defined in Section 1.5 of National Instrument 43-101;

7) I am a co-author of this technical report and have supervised the independent verification completed by SRK and the preparation of Section 13, 17 and 18.2 of this technical report for QP review. I accept professional responsibility for those sections I co-authored;

8) I have had no prior involvement with the subject property;

9) I have read National Instrument 43-101 and confirm that this technical report has been prepared in compliance therewith;

10) SRK Consulting (Canada) Inc. was retained by Silvercorp Metals Inc. to prepare a technical audit of the Condor Project. In conducting our audit, a gap analysis of project technical data was completed using CIM *Estimation of Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves Best Practice Guidelines* and Canadian Securities Administrators National Instrument 43-101 guidelines. The preceding report is based on a site visit, a review of project files and discussions with Silvercorp Metals Inc. personnel;

11) I have not received, nor do I expect to receive, any interest, directly or indirectly, in the Condor Project or securities of Silvercorp Metals Inc.; and

12) That, as of the date of this certificate, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief, this technical report contains all scientific and technical information that is required to be disclosed to make the technical report not misleading.

*<u>["signed and sealed"]</u>* <br> Beijing Lanliang Niu, MAusIMM <br> May 12, 2025 Principal Consultant (Mineral Processing)

<br> SRK CONSULTING (CANADA) INC. ■ MAY 12, 2025

![](ex99-1_086.jpg)

**© 2025 SRK Consulting (Canada) Inc.**

This document, as a collective work of content and the coordination, arrangement and any enhancement of said content, is protected by copyright vested in SRK Consulting (Canada) Inc. (SRK).

## Exhibit 99.2

------

**Exhibit 99.2** <br>

![](exhibit99-2x1x1.jpg)<br>

June 12, 2025

Toronto Stock Exchange<br>British Columbia Securities Commission <br>Alberta Securities Commission <br>Saskatchewan Financial Services Commission <br>Manitoba Securities Commission <br>Ontario Securities Commission <br>Autorite des marches financiers <br>New Brunswick Securities Commission <br>Nova Scotia Securities Commission <br>Securities Commission of Newfoundland and Labrador <br>Superintendent of Securities, Prince Edward Island

Dear Sirs/Mesdames,

**CONSENT OF QUALIFIED PERSON**

I, Mark Wanless, consent to the public filing by Silvercorp Metals Inc. (the "Company") of the technical report titled "Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador" dated May 12, 2025 (the "Technical Report") prepared for the Company with an effective date of February 28, 2025.

Yours faithfully,

Original signed by<br>Mark Wanless, PrSciNat, FGSSA

Qualified Person Signature <br>Principal Consultant (Geology)<br>

------

## Exhibit 99.3

------

**Exhibit 99.3**

**CERTIFICATE OF QUALIFIED PERSON**

To accompany the report entitled: Independent Technical Report for the Condor Project, Ecuador dated May 12, 2025.

I, Mark Wanless, residing at 47 Ball Crescent, Whitby, ON, Canada do hereby certify that:

1) I am a Principal Geologist with the firm of SRK Consulting (Canada) Inc. (SRK) with an office at Suite 1500 - 155 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, Canada;

2) I am a graduate of the University of Cape Town with a BSc (Hons) in Geology in 1995. I have practiced my profession continuously since 1996. During the past 28 years, I have undertaken numerous Mineral Resource estimates and audits for gold and multi commodity projects and operating mines in several countries across five continents;

3) I am a professional Geoscientist registered with the South African Council for Natural Scientific Professionals (Registration No 400178/05). I am a Fellow of the Geological Society of South African and a Member of the Geostatistical Association of South Africa and a Member of the South African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy;

4) I have personally inspected the subject project June 19-20, 2024;

5) I have read the definition of Qualified Person set out in National Instrument 43-101 and certify that by virtue of my education, affiliation to a professional association, and past relevant work experience, I fulfill the requirements to be a Qualified Person for the purposes of National Instrument 43-101 and this technical report has been prepared in compliance with National Instrument 43-101 and Form 43-101F1;

6) I, as a Qualified Person, I am independent of the issuer as defined in Section 1.5 of National Instrument 43-101;

7) I am the co-author of this report and responsible for sections 1 to 11 and 12 to 18 and accept professional responsibility for those sections of this technical report;

8) I have had no prior involvement with the subject property;

9) I have read National Instrument 43-101 and confirm that this technical report has been prepared in compliance therewith; <br>

10) SRK Consulting (Canada) Inc. was retained by Silvercorp Metals Inc. to prepare a technical audit of the Condor Project. In conducting our audit, a gap analysis of project technical data was completed using CIM Estimation of Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves Best Practice Guidelines and Canadian Securities Administrators National Instrument 43-101 guidelines. The preceding report is based on a site visit, a review of project files and discussions with Silvercorp Metals Inc. personnel;

11) I have not received, nor do I expect to receive, any interest, directly or indirectly, in the Condor Project or securities of Silvercorp Metals Inc.; and

12) That, as of the date of this certificate, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief, this technical report contains all scientific and technical information that is required to be disclosed to make the technical report not misleading. <br>

Effective Date: February 28, 2025<br>Signing Date: June 12, 2025

<u>*"Mark Wanless"*</u>

Mark Wanless, PrSciNat, FGSSA<br>Principal Consultant (Geology)<br>

------