Invesco Frontier Markets ETF (FRN)

TotalReturn:

'Total return is the amount of value an investor earns from a security over a specific period, typically one year, when all distributions are reinvested. Total return is expressed as a percentage of the amount invested. For example, a total return of 20% means the security increased by 20% of its original value due to a price increase, distribution of dividends (if a stock), coupons (if a bond) or capital gains (if a fund). Total return is a strong measure of an investment’s overall performance.'

• The total return, or increase in value over 5 years of Invesco Frontier Markets ETF is 3.5%, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (68.2%) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the total return, or increase in value is 38.7%, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 47.7% from the benchmark.

CAGR:

'The compound annual growth rate (CAGR) is a useful measure of growth over multiple time periods. It can be thought of as the growth rate that gets you from the initial investment value to the ending investment value if you assume that the investment has been compounding over the time period.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (11%) in the period of the last 5 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 0.7% of Invesco Frontier Markets ETF is lower, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the annual return (CAGR) is 11.5%, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 13.9% 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.'

• Looking at the volatility of 14.1% in the last 5 years of Invesco Frontier Markets ETF, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (13.2%)
• During the last 3 years, the 30 days standard deviation is 12.8%, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 12.4% from the benchmark.

DownVol:

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

• Looking at the downside volatility of 15.2% in the last 5 years of Invesco Frontier Markets ETF, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (14.6%)
• Compared with SPY (14%) in the period of the last 3 years, the downside deviation of 14.2% is larger, thus worse.

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 risk / return profile (Sharpe) of -0.13 in the last 5 years of Invesco Frontier Markets ETF, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.64)
• Looking at Sharpe Ratio in of 0.71 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to SPY (0.92).

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.58) in the period of the last 5 years, the excess return divided by the downside deviation of -0.12 of Invesco Frontier Markets ETF is smaller, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (0.81) in the period of the last 3 years, the excess return divided by the downside deviation of 0.63 is lower, thus worse.

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.'

• The Ulcer Index over 5 years of Invesco Frontier Markets ETF is 22 , which is greater, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (3.95 ) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the Downside risk index is 10 , which is higher, thus better than the value of 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.'

• Looking at the maximum reduction from previous high of -44.9 days in the last 5 years of Invesco Frontier Markets ETF, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (-19.3 days)
• Compared with SPY (-19.3 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum drop from peak to valley of -26.6 days is lower, 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'

• The maximum days below previous high over 5 years of Invesco Frontier Markets ETF is 879 days, which is greater, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (187 days) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (131 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum days under water of 241 days is larger, 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.'

• Looking at the average days under water of 342 days in the last 5 years of Invesco Frontier Markets ETF, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (39 days)
• During the last 3 years, the average time in days below previous high water mark is 54 days, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 33 days from the benchmark.