'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:- The total return, or increase in value over 5 years of Global X Gold Explorers ETF is 34.9%, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (129.1%) in the same period.
- Looking at total return, or increase in value in of 59.5% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (71.3%).

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- Looking at the annual return (CAGR) of 6.2% 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 (18.1%)
- Compared with SPY (19.7%) in the period of the last 3 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 16.8% is smaller, thus worse.

'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 volatility over 5 years of Global X Gold Explorers ETF is 39.4%, which is larger, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (18.7%) in the same period.
- Looking at 30 days standard deviation in of 44% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (22.5%).

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Looking at the downside volatility of 27.5% in the last 5 years of Global X Gold Explorers ETF, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (13.6%)
- During the last 3 years, the downside deviation is 30.6%, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 16.3% from the benchmark.

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.83) in the period of the last 5 years, the risk / return profile (Sharpe) of 0.09 of Global X Gold Explorers ETF is smaller, thus worse.
- Looking at ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) in of 0.33 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to SPY (0.76).

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (1.15) in the period of the last 5 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of 0.13 of Global X Gold Explorers ETF is lower, thus worse.
- Compared with SPY (1.05) in the period of the last 3 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of 0.47 is lower, thus worse.

'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 19 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 (5.59 )
- Looking at Ulcer Ratio in of 15 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (6.38 ).

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Looking at the maximum DrawDown of -48.7 days in the last 5 years of Global X Gold Explorers ETF, we see it is relatively smaller, 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.

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- Looking at the maximum days below previous high of 618 days in the last 5 years of Global X Gold Explorers ETF, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (139 days)
- Compared with SPY (119 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum days below previous high of 302 days is higher, thus worse.

'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:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (32 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the average time in days below previous high water mark of 209 days of Global X Gold Explorers ETF is greater, thus worse.
- Compared with SPY (25 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the average days under water of 97 days is larger, thus worse.

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 Global X Gold Explorers 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.