'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- Looking at the total return of -2.4% in the last 5 years of VanEck Vectors Gaming ETF, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (58.9%)
- Compared with SPY (33.9%) in the period of the last 3 years, the total return, or performance of 14.3% is lower, thus worse.

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- The compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) over 5 years of VanEck Vectors Gaming ETF is -0.5%, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (9.7%) in the same period.
- Looking at compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) in of 4.6% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (10.2%).

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- The volatility over 5 years of VanEck Vectors Gaming ETF is 30%, which is larger, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (21.6%) in the same period.
- Compared with SPY (25%) in the period of the last 3 years, the volatility of 35.1% is larger, thus worse.

'Downside risk is the financial risk associated with losses. That is, it is the risk of the actual return being below the expected return, or the uncertainty about the magnitude of that difference. Risk measures typically quantify the downside risk, whereas the standard deviation (an example of a deviation risk measure) measures both the upside and downside risk. Specifically, downside risk in our definition is the semi-deviation, that is the standard deviation of all negative returns.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Looking at the downside volatility of 21.5% in the last 5 years of VanEck Vectors Gaming ETF, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (15.7%)
- Looking at downside risk in of 25.1% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (18.1%).

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- The risk / return profile (Sharpe) over 5 years of VanEck Vectors Gaming ETF is -0.1, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.33) in the same period.
- Compared with SPY (0.31) in the period of the last 3 years, the Sharpe Ratio of 0.06 is lower, thus worse.

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Looking at the excess return divided by the downside deviation of -0.14 in the last 5 years of VanEck Vectors Gaming ETF, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.46)
- Compared with SPY (0.43) in the period of the last 3 years, the excess return divided by the downside deviation of 0.08 is lower, thus worse.

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- The Downside risk index over 5 years of VanEck Vectors Gaming ETF is 24 , which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (8.91 ) in the same period.
- During the last 3 years, the Ulcer Ratio is 24 , which is larger, thus worse than the value of 11 from the benchmark.

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (-33.7 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum DrawDown of -56.4 days of VanEck Vectors Gaming ETF is lower, thus worse.
- During the last 3 years, the maximum DrawDown is -51.9 days, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of -33.7 days from the benchmark.

'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) in days.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (271 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark of 648 days of VanEck Vectors Gaming ETF is higher, thus worse.
- During the last 3 years, the maximum days under water is 473 days, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 271 days from the benchmark.

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (60 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the average days below previous high of 263 days of VanEck Vectors Gaming ETF is greater, thus worse.
- During the last 3 years, the average time in days below previous high water mark is 182 days, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 72 days from the benchmark.

Historical returns have been extended using synthetic data.
[Show Details]

- Note that yearly returns do not equal the sum of monthly returns due to compounding.
- Performance results of VanEck Vectors Gaming ETF are hypothetical, do not account for slippage, fees or taxes, and are based on backtesting, which has many inherent limitations, some of which are described in our Terms of Use.