'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- The total return, or increase in value over 5 years of iShares China Large-Cap ETF is -6.4%, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (60.9%) in the same period.
- Looking at total return, or performance in of 8% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (34.2%).

'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:- The annual return (CAGR) over 5 years of iShares China Large-Cap ETF is -1.3%, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (10%) in the same period.
- During the last 3 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) is 2.6%, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of 10.3% 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:- The 30 days standard deviation over 5 years of iShares China Large-Cap ETF is 24.3%, which is greater, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (18.7%) in the same period.
- Looking at 30 days standard deviation in of 24.1% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (21.5%).

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

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- The downside deviation over 5 years of iShares China Large-Cap ETF is 17.8%, which is larger, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (13.6%) in the same period.
- Compared with SPY (15.7%) in the period of the last 3 years, the downside risk of 17.8% is higher, thus worse.

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.4) in the period of the last 5 years, the Sharpe Ratio of -0.16 of iShares China Large-Cap ETF is smaller, thus worse.
- Compared with SPY (0.36) in the period of the last 3 years, the ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) of 0 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:- The downside risk / excess return profile over 5 years of iShares China Large-Cap ETF is -0.21, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.55) in the same period.
- Looking at ratio of annual return and downside deviation in of 0.01 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to SPY (0.5).

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- Looking at the Ulcer Ratio of 21 in the last 5 years of iShares China Large-Cap ETF, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (5.82 )
- During the last 3 years, the Downside risk index is 18 , which is higher, thus worse than the value of 6.86 from the benchmark.

'A maximum drawdown is the maximum loss from a peak to a trough of a portfolio, before a new peak is attained. Maximum Drawdown is an indicator of downside risk over a specified time period. It can be used both as a stand-alone measure or as an input into other metrics such as 'Return over Maximum Drawdown' and the Calmar Ratio. Maximum Drawdown is expressed in percentage terms.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Looking at the maximum DrawDown of -41.1 days in the last 5 years of iShares China Large-Cap ETF, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (-33.7 days)
- During the last 3 years, the maximum DrawDown is -33.8 days, which is lower, 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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Looking at the maximum days under water of 615 days in the last 5 years of iShares China Large-Cap ETF, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (187 days)
- During the last 3 years, the maximum days below previous high is 590 days, which is higher, thus worse than the value of 139 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:- The average days below previous high over 5 years of iShares China Large-Cap ETF is 294 days, which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (43 days) in the same period.
- During the last 3 years, the average time in days below previous high water mark is 248 days, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 39 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 iShares China Large-Cap 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.