iShares China Large-Cap ETF (FXI)

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 iShares China Large-Cap ETF is 29.5%, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (121.6%) in the same period.
• Looking at total return, or increase in value in of -0.7% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (64.5%).

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 (17.3%) in the period of the last 5 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 5.3% of iShares China Large-Cap ETF is lower, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the annual performance (CAGR) is -0.2%, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 18.1% 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 30 days standard deviation of 23.1% in the last 5 years of iShares China Large-Cap ETF, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (18.7%)
• Looking at 30 days standard deviation in of 25.7% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to SPY (22.5%).

DownVol:

'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.'

• Looking at the downside volatility of 16.5% 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 (13.5%)
• Looking at downside volatility in of 18.5% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to SPY (16.4%).

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.'

• The Sharpe Ratio over 5 years of iShares China Large-Cap ETF is 0.12, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.79) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (0.69) in the period of the last 3 years, the risk / return profile (Sharpe) of -0.11 is lower, thus worse.

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.'

• The ratio of annual return and downside deviation over 5 years of iShares China Large-Cap ETF is 0.17, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (1.09) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation is -0.15, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 0.95 from the benchmark.

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 Downside risk index over 5 years of iShares China Large-Cap ETF is 15 , which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (5.58 ) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (6.83 ) in the period of the last 3 years, the Ulcer Index of 9.9 is higher, thus worse.

MaxDD:

'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.'

• The maximum reduction from previous high over 5 years of iShares China Large-Cap ETF is -33.8 days, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (-33.7 days) in the same period.
• Looking at maximum reduction from previous high in of -27.9 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus better in comparison to SPY (-33.7 days).

MaxDuration:

'The Maximum 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. It is the length of time the account was in the Max Drawdown. A Max Drawdown measures a retrenchment from when an equity curve reaches a new high. It’s the maximum an account lost during that retrenchment. This method is applied because a valley can’t be measured until a new high occurs. Once the new high is reached, the percentage change from the old high to the bottom of the largest trough is recorded.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (139 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark of 748 days of iShares China Large-Cap ETF is greater, thus worse.
• Looking at maximum time in days below previous high water mark in of 186 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (139 days).

AveDuration:

'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.'

• The average days under water over 5 years of iShares China Large-Cap ETF is 247 days, which is greater, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (33 days) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the average days under water is 59 days, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 35 days from the benchmark.