Global X Gold Explorers ETF (GOEX)

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (116.9%) in the period of the last 5 years, the total return, or increase in value of 51.2% of Global X Gold Explorers ETF is smaller, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the total return is 47.3%, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 63.4% 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.'

• The annual return (CAGR) over 5 years of Global X Gold Explorers ETF is 8.6%, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (16.8%) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the annual return (CAGR) is 13.8%, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 17.8% 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 41.7% in the last 5 years of Global X Gold Explorers ETF, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (18.7%)
• During the last 3 years, the 30 days standard deviation is 43.5%, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 22.5% from the benchmark.

DownVol:

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

• The downside risk over 5 years of Global X Gold Explorers ETF is 29.2%, which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (13.6%) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (16.3%) in the period of the last 3 years, the downside volatility of 30.4% is larger, thus worse.

Sharpe:

'The Sharpe ratio is the measure of risk-adjusted return of a financial portfolio. Sharpe ratio is a measure of excess portfolio return over the risk-free rate relative to its standard deviation. Normally, the 90-day Treasury bill rate is taken as the proxy for risk-free rate. A portfolio with a higher Sharpe ratio is considered superior relative to its peers. The measure was named after William F Sharpe, a Nobel laureate and professor of finance, emeritus at Stanford University.'

• Looking at the risk / return profile (Sharpe) of 0.15 in the last 5 years of Global X Gold Explorers ETF, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.76)
• Compared with SPY (0.68) in the period of the last 3 years, the risk / return profile (Sharpe) of 0.26 is smaller, thus worse.

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 (1.05) in the period of the last 5 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of 0.21 of Global X Gold Explorers ETF is lower, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the excess return divided by the downside deviation is 0.37, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 0.94 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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (5.58 ) in the period of the last 5 years, the Ulcer Index of 26 of Global X Gold Explorers ETF is larger, thus worse.
• Looking at Downside risk index in of 14 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (6.83 ).

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 DrawDown of -53.7 days in the last 5 years of Global X Gold Explorers 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 -48.7 days, which is lower, thus worse than the value of -33.7 days from the benchmark.

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.'

• The maximum time in days below previous high water mark over 5 years of Global X Gold Explorers ETF is 973 days, which is greater, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (139 days) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark is 280 days, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 139 days from the benchmark.

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 below previous high over 5 years of Global X Gold Explorers ETF is 399 days, which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (33 days) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the average days under water is 103 days, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 35 days from the benchmark.