iShares Global Financial ETF (IXG)

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 (97.3%) in the period of the last 5 years, the total return, or increase in value of 110.9% of iShares Global Financial ETF is higher, thus better.
• Compared with SPY (78.3%) in the period of the last 3 years, the total return, or increase in value of 71.6% is lower, thus worse.

CAGR:

'The compound annual growth rate isn't a true return rate, but rather a representational figure. It is essentially a number that describes the rate at which an investment would have grown if it had grown the same rate every year and the profits were reinvested at the end of each year. In reality, this sort of performance is unlikely. However, CAGR can be used to smooth returns so that they may be more easily understood when compared to alternative investments.'

• Looking at the annual return (CAGR) of 16.2% in the last 5 years of iShares Global Financial ETF, we see it is relatively greater, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (14.6%)
• During the last 3 years, the annual performance (CAGR) is 19.8%, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 21.4% 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 17.2% in the last 5 years of iShares Global Financial ETF, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (17.1%)
• Looking at volatility in of 15.2% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (15.2%).

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.'

• The downside risk over 5 years of iShares Global Financial ETF is 12%, which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (11.7%) in the same period.
• Looking at downside risk in of 10.7% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (10.2%).

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 ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) over 5 years of iShares Global Financial ETF is 0.79, which is greater, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (0.71) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (1.24) in the period of the last 3 years, the ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) of 1.14 is lower, thus worse.

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (1.03) in the period of the last 5 years, the excess return divided by the downside deviation of 1.14 of iShares Global Financial ETF is larger, thus better.
• Looking at ratio of annual return and downside deviation in of 1.62 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to SPY (1.85).

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 Global Financial ETF is 9.31 , which is larger, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (8.42 ) in the same period.
• Looking at Downside risk index in of 4.1 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (3.51 ).

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.'

• Looking at the maximum DrawDown of -27.2 days in the last 5 years of iShares Global Financial ETF, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (-24.5 days)
• During the last 3 years, the maximum reduction from previous high is -14.3 days, which is larger, thus better than the value of -18.8 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) in days.'

• The maximum time in days below previous high water mark over 5 years of iShares Global Financial ETF is 505 days, which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (488 days) in the same period.
• Looking at maximum time in days below previous high water mark in of 201 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 125 days in the last 5 years of iShares Global Financial ETF, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (120 days)
• During the last 3 years, the average days under water is 40 days, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 21 days from the benchmark.