SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF (GNR)

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (86.3%) in the period of the last 5 years, the total return, or increase in value of 68.5% of SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF is lower, thus worse.
• Looking at total return, or performance in of 48.6% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (79.8%).

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.'

• Looking at the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 11% in the last 5 years of SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (13.3%)
• Looking at annual performance (CAGR) in of 14.2% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (21.7%).

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.'

• Looking at the historical 30 days volatility of 20.2% in the last 5 years of SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (17.2%)
• Compared with SPY (15.4%) in the period of the last 3 years, the 30 days standard deviation of 17.4% is greater, thus worse.

DownVol:

'Downside risk is the financial risk associated with losses. That is, it is the risk of the actual return being below the expected return, or the uncertainty about the magnitude of that difference. 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.'

• The downside volatility over 5 years of SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF is 14.4%, which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (11.8%) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the downside deviation is 12.4%, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 10.3% 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.'

• The risk / return profile (Sharpe) over 5 years of SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF is 0.42, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.63) in the same period.
• Looking at ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) in of 0.67 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to SPY (1.25).

Sortino:

'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.'

• Looking at the downside risk / excess return profile of 0.59 in the last 5 years of SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.91)
• During the last 3 years, the excess return divided by the downside deviation is 0.94, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 1.86 from the benchmark.

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 8.56 in the last 5 years of SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (8.45 )
• Compared with SPY (3.37 ) in the period of the last 3 years, the Ulcer Ratio of 5.94 is higher, thus worse.

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 drop from peak to valley of -25.7 days in the last 5 years of SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (-24.5 days)
• Compared with SPY (-18.8 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum DrawDown of -21.1 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) in days.'

• Looking at the maximum days below previous high of 522 days in the last 5 years of SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (488 days)
• Looking at maximum days under water in of 314 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (87 days).

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 time in days below previous high water mark of 166 days in the last 5 years of SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (119 days)
• Compared with SPY (18 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the average days under water of 88 days is greater, thus worse.