'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:- The total return over 5 years of Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF is 57%, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (63%) in the same period.
- During the last 3 years, the total return, or performance is 27%, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 33.5% from the benchmark.

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (10.3%) in the period of the last 5 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 9.4% of Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF is lower, thus worse.
- During the last 3 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) is 8.3%, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 10.1% from the benchmark.

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Looking at the volatility of 21.1% in the last 5 years of Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF, we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (21.6%)
- Looking at volatility in of 25.3% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (25.1%).

'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:- The downside volatility over 5 years of Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF is 15.1%, which is smaller, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (15.6%) in the same period.
- Looking at downside volatility in of 18% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus better 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:- Looking at the ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) of 0.33 in the last 5 years of Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.36)
- Compared with SPY (0.3) in the period of the last 3 years, the Sharpe Ratio of 0.23 is smaller, 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:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.5) in the period of the last 5 years, the excess return divided by the downside deviation of 0.46 of Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF is smaller, thus worse.
- Looking at ratio of annual return and downside deviation in of 0.32 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to SPY (0.42).

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (8.88 ) in the period of the last 5 years, the Ulcer Ratio of 12 of Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF is greater, thus worse.
- Compared with SPY (11 ) in the period of the last 3 years, the Downside risk index of 15 is larger, thus worse.

'Maximum drawdown is defined as the peak-to-trough decline of an investment during a specific period. It is usually quoted as a percentage of the peak value. The maximum drawdown can be calculated based on absolute returns, in order to identify strategies that suffer less during market downturns, such as low-volatility strategies. However, the maximum drawdown can also be calculated based on returns relative to a benchmark index, for identifying strategies that show steady outperformance over time.'

Which means for our asset as example:- Looking at the maximum DrawDown of -35.7 days in the last 5 years of Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (-33.7 days)
- Looking at maximum reduction from previous high in of -35.7 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (-33.7 days).

'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:- Looking at the maximum days below previous high of 274 days in the last 5 years of Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (273 days)
- During the last 3 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark is 274 days, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 273 days from the benchmark.

'The Average Drawdown Duration is an extension of the Maximum Drawdown. However, this metric does not explain the drawdown in dollars or percentages, rather in days, weeks, or months. 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:- Looking at the average days under water of 62 days in the last 5 years of Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (57 days)
- Compared with SPY (73 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the average time in days below previous high water mark of 80 days is larger, thus worse.

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 Invesco S&P Global Water Index 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.