Gold-Currency Strategy II

TotalReturn:

'The total return on a portfolio of investments takes into account not only the capital appreciation on the portfolio, but also the income received on the portfolio. The income typically consists of interest, dividends, and securities lending fees. This contrasts with the price return, which takes into account only the capital gain on an investment.'

• Looking at the total return, or performance of 111.6% in the last 5 years of Gold-Currency Strategy II, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark GLD (146.8%)
• Compared with GLD (128%) in the period of the last 3 years, the total return, or performance of 120.9% is smaller, thus worse.

CAGR:

'The compound annual growth rate isn't a true return rate, but rather a representational figure. It is essentially a number that describes the rate at which an investment would have grown if it had grown the same rate every year and the profits were reinvested at the end of each year. In reality, this sort of performance is unlikely. However, CAGR can be used to smooth returns so that they may be more easily understood when compared to alternative investments.'

• Compared with the benchmark GLD (19.9%) in the period of the last 5 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 16.3% of Gold-Currency Strategy II is lower, thus worse.
• Compared with GLD (31.8%) in the period of the last 3 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 30.4% is lower, thus worse.

Volatility:

'Volatility is a rate at which the price of a security increases or decreases for a given set of returns. Volatility is measured by calculating the standard deviation of the annualized returns over a given period of time. It shows the range to which the price of a security may increase or decrease. Volatility measures the risk of a security. It is used in option pricing formula to gauge the fluctuations in the returns of the underlying assets. Volatility indicates the pricing behavior of the security and helps estimate the fluctuations that may happen in a short period of time.'

• Compared with the benchmark GLD (18.5%) in the period of the last 5 years, the 30 days standard deviation of 15.2% of Gold-Currency Strategy II is lower, thus better.
• During the last 3 years, the historical 30 days volatility is 18.6%, which is smaller, thus better than the value of 20.9% from the benchmark.

DownVol:

'The downside volatility is similar to the volatility, or standard deviation, but only takes losing/negative periods into account.'

• The downside risk over 5 years of Gold-Currency Strategy II is 10.8%, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark GLD (13%) in the same period.
• Looking at downside volatility in of 13.2% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to GLD (14.8%).

Sharpe:

'The Sharpe ratio (also known as the Sharpe index, the Sharpe measure, and the reward-to-variability ratio) is a way to examine the performance of an investment by adjusting for its risk. The ratio measures the excess return (or risk premium) per unit of deviation in an investment asset or a trading strategy, typically referred to as risk, named after William F. Sharpe.'

• Looking at the Sharpe Ratio of 0.91 in the last 5 years of Gold-Currency Strategy II, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark GLD (0.94)
• Compared with GLD (1.4) in the period of the last 3 years, the risk / return profile (Sharpe) of 1.5 is larger, thus better.

Sortino:

'The Sortino ratio, a variation of the Sharpe ratio only factors in the downside, or negative volatility, rather than the total volatility used in calculating the Sharpe ratio. The theory behind the Sortino variation is that upside volatility is a plus for the investment, and it, therefore, should not be included in the risk calculation. Therefore, the Sortino ratio takes upside volatility out of the equation and uses only the downside standard deviation in its calculation instead of the total standard deviation that is used in calculating the Sharpe ratio.'

• The downside risk / excess return profile over 5 years of Gold-Currency Strategy II is 1.27, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark GLD (1.34) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation is 2.12, which is greater, thus better than the value of 1.98 from the benchmark.

Ulcer:

'Ulcer Index is a method for measuring investment risk that addresses the real concerns of investors, unlike the widely used standard deviation of return. UI is a measure of the depth and duration of drawdowns in prices from earlier highs. Using Ulcer Index instead of standard deviation can lead to very different conclusions about investment risk and risk-adjusted return, especially when evaluating strategies that seek to avoid major declines in portfolio value (market timing, dynamic asset allocation, hedge funds, etc.). The Ulcer Index was originally developed in 1987. Since then, it has been widely recognized and adopted by the investment community. According to Nelson Freeburg, editor of Formula Research, Ulcer Index is “perhaps the most fully realized statistical portrait of risk there is.'

• Compared with the benchmark GLD (8.7 ) in the period of the last 5 years, the Ulcer Ratio of 7.66 of Gold-Currency Strategy II is smaller, thus better.
• During the last 3 years, the Downside risk index is 5.89 , which is lower, thus better than the value of 7.73 from the benchmark.

MaxDD:

'Maximum drawdown measures the loss in any losing period during a fund’s investment record. It is defined as the percent retrenchment from a fund’s peak value to the fund’s valley value. The drawdown is in effect from the time the fund’s retrenchment begins until a new fund high is reached. The maximum drawdown encompasses both the period from the fund’s peak to the fund’s valley (length), and the time from the fund’s valley to a new fund high (recovery). It measures the largest percentage drawdown that has occurred in any fund’s data record.'

• Compared with the benchmark GLD (-26.4 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum reduction from previous high of -19.2 days of Gold-Currency Strategy II is larger, thus better.
• Looking at maximum reduction from previous high in of -19.2 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to GLD (-26.4 days).

MaxDuration:

'The Drawdown Duration is the length of any peak to peak period, or the time between new equity highs. The Max Drawdown Duration is the worst (the maximum/longest) amount of time an investment has seen between peaks (equity highs). Many assume Max DD Duration is the length of time between new highs during which the Max DD (magnitude) occurred. But that isn’t always the case. The Max DD duration is the longest time between peaks, period. So it could be the time when the program also had its biggest peak to valley loss (and usually is, because the program needs a long time to recover from the largest loss), but it doesn’t have to be'

• Compared with the benchmark GLD (436 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark of 590 days of Gold-Currency Strategy II is larger, thus worse.
• Compared with GLD (134 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum days below previous high of 134 days is higher, thus worse.

AveDuration:

'The Drawdown Duration is the length of any peak to peak period, or the time between new equity highs. The Avg Drawdown Duration is the average amount of time an investment has seen between peaks (equity highs), or in other terms the average of time under water of all drawdowns. So in contrast to the Maximum duration it does not measure only one drawdown event but calculates the average of all.'

• The average days below previous high over 5 years of Gold-Currency Strategy II is 167 days, which is larger, thus worse compared to the benchmark GLD (101 days) in the same period.
• Looking at average time in days below previous high water mark in of 27 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to GLD (27 days).