VanEck Vectors Coal ETF (KOL)

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.'

• Looking at the total return, or performance of 30.7% in the last 5 years of VanEck Vectors Coal ETF, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (105.2%)
• Looking at total return, or performance in of 0% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (58%).

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 (15.5%) in the period of the last 5 years, the annual performance (CAGR) of 5.5% of VanEck Vectors Coal ETF is lower, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the annual return (CAGR) is 0%, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 16.6% 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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (17.5%) in the period of the last 5 years, the 30 days standard deviation of 5.9% of VanEck Vectors Coal ETF is lower, thus better.
• Compared with SPY (17.2%) in the period of the last 3 years, the volatility of 0% is lower, thus better.

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (12.1%) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside volatility of 3.6% of VanEck Vectors Coal ETF is lower, thus better.
• Looking at downside risk in of 0% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to SPY (11.5%).

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 risk / return profile (Sharpe) of 0.51 in the last 5 years of VanEck Vectors Coal ETF, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.74)
• Compared with SPY (0.82) in the period of the last 3 years, the ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) of 0 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.'

• Looking at the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of 0.85 in the last 5 years of VanEck Vectors Coal ETF, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (1.08)
• Looking at ratio of annual return and downside deviation in of 0 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (1.22).

Ulcer:

'The ulcer index is a stock market risk measure or technical analysis indicator devised by Peter Martin in 1987, and published by him and Byron McCann in their 1989 book The Investors Guide to Fidelity Funds. It's designed as a measure of volatility, but only volatility in the downward direction, i.e. the amount of drawdown or retracement occurring over a period. Other volatility measures like standard deviation treat up and down movement equally, but a trader doesn't mind upward movement, it's the downside that causes stress and stomach ulcers that the index's name suggests.'

• The Ulcer Ratio over 5 years of VanEck Vectors Coal ETF is 1.27 , which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (8.48 ) in the same period.
• Looking at Ulcer Index in of 0 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to SPY (5.31 ).

MaxDD:

'A maximum drawdown is the maximum loss from a peak to a trough of a portfolio, before a new peak is attained. Maximum Drawdown is an indicator of downside risk over a specified time period. It can be used both as a stand-alone measure or as an input into other metrics such as 'Return over Maximum Drawdown' and the Calmar Ratio. Maximum Drawdown is expressed in percentage terms.'

• Looking at the maximum drop from peak to valley of -9.3 days in the last 5 years of VanEck Vectors Coal ETF, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (-24.5 days)
• Looking at maximum reduction from previous high in of 0 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus better in comparison to SPY (-18.8 days).

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (488 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark of 1170 days of VanEck Vectors Coal ETF is greater, thus worse.
• Looking at maximum days under water in of 0 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to SPY (199 days).

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.'

• Looking at the average time in days below previous high water mark of 556 days in the last 5 years of VanEck Vectors Coal ETF, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (120 days)
• During the last 3 years, the average days below previous high is 0 days, which is lower, thus better than the value of 47 days from the benchmark.