'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:- Looking at the total return, or performance of 41.1% in the last 5 years of VanEck Vectors Gold Miners ETF, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (98.3%)
- Compared with SPY (27.2%) in the period of the last 3 years, the total return of 21% is smaller, thus worse.

'Compound annual growth rate (CAGR) is a business and investing specific term for the geometric progression ratio that provides a constant rate of return over the time period. CAGR is not an accounting term, but it is often used to describe some element of the business, for example revenue, units delivered, registered users, etc. CAGR dampens the effect of volatility of periodic returns that can render arithmetic means irrelevant. It is particularly useful to compare growth rates from various data sets of common domain such as revenue growth of companies in the same industry.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (14.7%) in the period of the last 5 years, the annual performance (CAGR) of 7.1% of VanEck Vectors Gold Miners ETF is smaller, thus worse.
- During the last 3 years, the annual performance (CAGR) is 6.6%, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 8.4% 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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (20.9%) in the period of the last 5 years, the volatility of 39.6% of VanEck Vectors Gold Miners ETF is larger, thus worse.
- Compared with SPY (17.7%) in the period of the last 3 years, the 30 days standard deviation of 33.7% is greater, thus worse.

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

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- The downside deviation over 5 years of VanEck Vectors Gold Miners ETF is 27.3%, which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (14.9%) in the same period.
- During the last 3 years, the downside risk is 22.9%, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 12.4% from the benchmark.

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- The Sharpe Ratio over 5 years of VanEck Vectors Gold Miners ETF is 0.12, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.58) in the same period.
- Looking at risk / return profile (Sharpe) in of 0.12 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (0.33).

'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 VanEck Vectors Gold Miners ETF is 0.17, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.82) in the same period.
- Looking at excess return divided by the downside deviation in of 0.18 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (0.47).

'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 Index of 25 in the last 5 years of VanEck Vectors Gold Miners ETF, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (9.32 )
- Compared with SPY (10 ) in the period of the last 3 years, the Ulcer Index of 24 is larger, thus worse.

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (-33.7 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum reduction from previous high of -49.8 days of VanEck Vectors Gold Miners ETF is lower, thus worse.
- During the last 3 years, the maximum DrawDown is -46.5 days, which is lower, thus worse than the value of -24.5 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). 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'

Which means for our asset as example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (488 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum days below previous high of 1029 days of VanEck Vectors Gold Miners ETF is greater, thus worse.
- Looking at maximum time in days below previous high water mark in of 588 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (488 days).

'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:- The average days under water over 5 years of VanEck Vectors Gold Miners ETF is 434 days, which is larger, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (123 days) in the same period.
- Looking at average days below previous high in of 241 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (177 days).

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 VanEck Vectors Gold Miners ETF are hypothetical and do not account for slippage, fees or taxes.