VanEck Vectors Natural Resources ETF (HAP)

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 (67.9%) in the period of the last 5 years, the total return, or performance of 39.1% of VanEck Vectors Natural Resources ETF is lower, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the total return is 64.5%, which is larger, thus better than the value of 44.5% 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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (10.9%) in the period of the last 5 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 6.8% of VanEck Vectors Natural Resources ETF is smaller, thus worse.
• Looking at annual return (CAGR) in of 18% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to SPY (13.1%).

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.'

• The historical 30 days volatility over 5 years of VanEck Vectors Natural Resources ETF is 23.7%, which is larger, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (21.4%) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (18.7%) in the period of the last 3 years, the 30 days standard deviation of 21.3% is higher, thus worse.

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 risk of 17.5% in the last 5 years of VanEck Vectors Natural Resources ETF, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (15.4%)
• During the last 3 years, the downside risk is 15.1%, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 13.3% from the benchmark.

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.'

• Looking at the ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) of 0.18 in the last 5 years of VanEck Vectors Natural Resources ETF, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.39)
• During the last 3 years, the risk / return profile (Sharpe) is 0.73, which is higher, thus better than the value of 0.56 from the benchmark.

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 excess return divided by the downside deviation over 5 years of VanEck Vectors Natural Resources ETF is 0.25, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.55) in the same period.
• Looking at downside risk / excess return profile in of 1.03 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to SPY (0.79).

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 VanEck Vectors Natural Resources ETF is 11 , which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (9.47 ) in the same period.
• Looking at Ulcer Index in of 9.1 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to SPY (10 ).

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 DrawDown over 5 years of VanEck Vectors Natural Resources ETF is -43.9 days, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (-33.7 days) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the maximum drop from peak to valley is -25.7 days, which is lower, thus worse than the value of -24.5 days from the benchmark.

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). 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'

• The maximum days under water over 5 years of VanEck Vectors Natural Resources ETF is 380 days, which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (354 days) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the maximum days under water is 280 days, which is lower, thus better than the value of 354 days from the benchmark.

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 128 days in the last 5 years of VanEck Vectors Natural Resources ETF, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (79 days)
• During the last 3 years, the average days below previous high is 82 days, which is lower, thus better than the value of 102 days from the benchmark.