iShares MSCI Japan Index Fund (EWJ)

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 increase in value of 52.8% in the last 5 years of iShares MSCI Japan Index Fund, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (93.2%)
• Compared with SPY (80.1%) in the period of the last 3 years, the total return, or performance of 80.4% is larger, thus better.

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 SPY (14.1%) in the period of the last 5 years, the annual performance (CAGR) of 8.9% of iShares MSCI Japan Index Fund is lower, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (21.8%) in the period of the last 3 years, the annual return (CAGR) of 21.9% is higher, thus better.

Volatility:

'Volatility is a statistical measure of the dispersion of returns for a given security or market index. Volatility can either be measured by using the standard deviation or variance between returns from that same security or market index. Commonly, the higher the volatility, the riskier the security. In the securities markets, volatility is often associated with big swings in either direction. For example, when the stock market rises and falls more than one percent over a sustained period of time, it is called a 'volatile' market.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (17%) in the period of the last 5 years, the volatility of 17.7% of iShares MSCI Japan Index Fund is larger, thus worse.
• Looking at 30 days standard deviation in of 17.8% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (15.1%).

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 iShares MSCI Japan Index Fund is 12.2%, which is larger, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (11.7%) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the downside volatility is 12%, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 10.1% from the benchmark.

Sharpe:

'The Sharpe ratio was developed by Nobel laureate William F. Sharpe, and is used to help investors understand the return of an investment compared to its risk. The ratio is the average return earned in excess of the risk-free rate per unit of volatility or total risk. Subtracting the risk-free rate from the mean return allows an investor to better isolate the profits associated with risk-taking activities. One intuition of this calculation is that a portfolio engaging in 'zero risk' investments, such as the purchase of U.S. Treasury bills (for which the expected return is the risk-free rate), has a Sharpe ratio of exactly zero. Generally, the greater the value of the Sharpe ratio, the more attractive the risk-adjusted return.'

• Looking at the Sharpe Ratio of 0.36 in the last 5 years of iShares MSCI Japan Index Fund, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.68)
• Looking at Sharpe Ratio in of 1.09 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (1.28).

Sortino:

'The Sortino ratio improves upon the Sharpe ratio by isolating downside volatility from total volatility by dividing excess return by the downside deviation. The Sortino ratio is a variation of the Sharpe ratio that differentiates harmful volatility from total overall volatility by using the asset's standard deviation of negative asset returns, called downside deviation. The Sortino ratio takes the asset's return and subtracts the risk-free rate, and then divides that amount by the asset's downside deviation. The ratio was named after Frank A. Sortino.'

• Looking at the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of 0.52 in the last 5 years of iShares MSCI Japan Index Fund, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.99)
• Compared with SPY (1.91) in the period of the last 3 years, the excess return divided by the downside deviation of 1.61 is smaller, thus worse.

Ulcer:

'The ulcer index is a stock market risk measure or technical analysis indicator devised by Peter Martin in 1987, and published by him and Byron McCann in their 1989 book The Investors Guide to Fidelity Funds. It's designed as a measure of volatility, but only volatility in the downward direction, i.e. the amount of drawdown or retracement occurring over a period. Other volatility measures like standard deviation treat up and down movement equally, but a trader doesn't mind upward movement, it's the downside that causes stress and stomach ulcers that the index's name suggests.'

• Looking at the Downside risk index of 13 in the last 5 years of iShares MSCI Japan Index Fund, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (8.42 )
• During the last 3 years, the Ulcer Index is 3.83 , which is larger, thus worse than the value of 3.4 from the benchmark.

MaxDD:

'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.'

• The maximum reduction from previous high over 5 years of iShares MSCI Japan Index Fund is -33.1 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 DrawDown of -14.7 days is larger, thus better.

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 days below previous high of 620 days of iShares MSCI Japan Index Fund is larger, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the maximum days under water is 145 days, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 87 days from the benchmark.

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 under water over 5 years of iShares MSCI Japan Index Fund is 179 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 below previous high is 35 days, which is higher, thus worse than the value of 19 days from the benchmark.