VanEck Vectors Gaming ETF (BJK)

TotalReturn:

'Total return, when measuring performance, is the actual rate of return of an investment or a pool of investments over a given evaluation period. Total return includes interest, capital gains, dividends and distributions realized over a given period of time. Total return accounts for two categories of return: income including interest paid by fixed-income investments, distributions or dividends and capital appreciation, representing the change in the market price of an asset.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (107.8%) in the period of the last 5 years, the total return, or increase in value of 26.4% of VanEck Vectors Gaming ETF is lower, thus worse.
• Looking at total return, or performance in of 13.5% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to SPY (43.5%).

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.'

• Looking at the annual return (CAGR) of 4.8% in the last 5 years of VanEck Vectors Gaming ETF, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (15.8%)
• During the last 3 years, the annual performance (CAGR) is 4.3%, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 12.9% from the benchmark.

Volatility:

'In finance, volatility (symbol σ) is the degree of variation of a trading price series over time as measured by the standard deviation of logarithmic returns. Historic volatility measures a time series of past market prices. Implied volatility looks forward in time, being derived from the market price of a market-traded derivative (in particular, an option). Commonly, the higher the volatility, the riskier the security.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (17.9%) in the period of the last 5 years, the volatility of 26.2% of VanEck Vectors Gaming ETF is larger, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (18.4%) in the period of the last 3 years, the historical 30 days volatility of 24.5% is higher, thus worse.

DownVol:

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

• The downside volatility over 5 years of VanEck Vectors Gaming ETF is 18.2%, which is greater, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (12.5%) in the same period.
• Looking at downside risk in of 17.1% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to SPY (12.6%).

Sharpe:

'The Sharpe ratio is the measure of risk-adjusted return of a financial portfolio. Sharpe ratio is a measure of excess portfolio return over the risk-free rate relative to its standard deviation. Normally, the 90-day Treasury bill rate is taken as the proxy for risk-free rate. A portfolio with a higher Sharpe ratio is considered superior relative to its peers. The measure was named after William F Sharpe, a Nobel laureate and professor of finance, emeritus at Stanford University.'

• The Sharpe Ratio over 5 years of VanEck Vectors Gaming ETF is 0.09, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.74) in the same period.
• Looking at Sharpe Ratio in of 0.07 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (0.56).

Sortino:

'The Sortino ratio measures the risk-adjusted return of an investment asset, portfolio, or strategy. It is a modification of the Sharpe ratio but penalizes only those returns falling below a user-specified target or required rate of return, while the Sharpe ratio penalizes both upside and downside volatility equally. Though both ratios measure an investment's risk-adjusted return, they do so in significantly different ways that will frequently lead to differing conclusions as to the true nature of the investment's return-generating efficiency. The Sortino ratio is used as a way to compare the risk-adjusted performance of programs with differing risk and return profiles. In general, risk-adjusted returns seek to normalize the risk across programs and then see which has the higher return unit per risk.'

• Looking at the excess return divided by the downside deviation of 0.13 in the last 5 years of VanEck Vectors Gaming ETF, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (1.07)
• Compared with SPY (0.82) in the period of the last 3 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of 0.11 is lower, thus worse.

Ulcer:

'The Ulcer Index is a technical indicator that measures downside risk, in terms of both the depth and duration of price declines. The index increases in value as the price moves farther away from a recent high and falls as the price rises to new highs. The indicator is usually calculated over a 14-day period, with the Ulcer Index showing the percentage drawdown a trader can expect from the high over that period. The greater the value of the Ulcer Index, the longer it takes for a stock to get back to the former high.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (8.48 ) in the period of the last 5 years, the Ulcer Ratio of 24 of VanEck Vectors Gaming ETF is higher, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the Ulcer Index is 9.73 , which is greater, thus worse than the value of 5.54 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.'

• The maximum drop from peak to valley over 5 years of VanEck Vectors Gaming ETF is -43.8 days, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (-24.5 days) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (-18.8 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum drop from peak to valley of -25.4 days is smaller, thus worse.

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 SPY (488 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark of 1041 days of VanEck Vectors Gaming ETF is larger, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (199 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum days below previous high of 456 days is greater, 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 VanEck Vectors Gaming ETF is 452 days, which is larger, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (119 days) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the average days under water is 152 days, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 44 days from the benchmark.