iShares Latin America 40 ETF (ILF)

TotalReturn:

'Total return, when measuring performance, is the actual rate of return of an investment or a pool of investments over a given evaluation period. Total return includes interest, capital gains, dividends and distributions realized over a given period of time. Total return accounts for two categories of return: income including interest paid by fixed-income investments, distributions or dividends and capital appreciation, representing the change in the market price of an asset.'

• Looking at the total return, or increase in value of -0.1% in the last 5 years of iShares Latin America 40 ETF, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (94.2%)
• Looking at total return in of 6.8% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (27.9%).

CAGR:

'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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (14.2%) in the period of the last 5 years, the annual performance (CAGR) of 0% of iShares Latin America 40 ETF is lower, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) is 2.2%, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of 8.6% 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.'

• The historical 30 days volatility over 5 years of iShares Latin America 40 ETF is 32.3%, which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (20.9%) in the same period.
• Looking at volatility in of 24% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (17.3%).

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 risk over 5 years of iShares Latin America 40 ETF is 23.9%, which is greater, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (15%) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the downside volatility is 17.1%, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 12.1% 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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.56) in the period of the last 5 years, the risk / return profile (Sharpe) of -0.08 of iShares Latin America 40 ETF is lower, thus worse.
• Looking at ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) in of -0.01 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (0.35).

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 (0.78) in the period of the last 5 years, the excess return divided by the downside deviation of -0.11 of iShares Latin America 40 ETF is lower, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the downside risk / excess return profile is -0.02, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of 0.5 from the benchmark.

Ulcer:

'The Ulcer Index is a technical indicator that measures downside risk, in terms of both the depth and duration of price declines. The index increases in value as the price moves farther away from a recent high and falls as the price rises to new highs. The indicator is usually calculated over a 14-day period, with the Ulcer Index showing the percentage drawdown a trader can expect from the high over that period. The greater the value of the Ulcer Index, the longer it takes for a stock to get back to the former high.'

• The Ulcer Ratio over 5 years of iShares Latin America 40 ETF is 20 , which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (9.32 ) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (10 ) in the period of the last 3 years, the Ulcer Index of 13 is larger, 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 reduction from previous high of -55.1 days in the last 5 years of iShares Latin America 40 ETF, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (-33.7 days)
• Looking at maximum DrawDown in of -29.7 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (-24.5 days).

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 under water of 868 days in the last 5 years of iShares Latin America 40 ETF, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (488 days)
• During the last 3 years, the maximum days below previous high is 299 days, which is lower, thus better than the value of 488 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.'

• The average days under water over 5 years of iShares Latin America 40 ETF is 321 days, which is larger, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (123 days) in the same period.
• Looking at average days under water in of 101 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to SPY (180 days).