iShares Global Materials ETF (MXI)

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 increase in value of 54.9% in the last 5 years of iShares Global Materials ETF, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (123.3%)
• Looking at total return, or increase in value in of 36% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to SPY (82.1%).

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 (17.5%) in the period of the last 5 years, the annual return (CAGR) of 9.2% of iShares Global Materials ETF is lower, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (22.2%) in the period of the last 3 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 10.8% is lower, thus worse.

Volatility:

'Volatility is a rate at which the price of a security increases or decreases for a given set of returns. Volatility is measured by calculating the standard deviation of the annualized returns over a given period of time. It shows the range to which the price of a security may increase or decrease. Volatility measures the risk of a security. It is used in option pricing formula to gauge the fluctuations in the returns of the underlying assets. Volatility indicates the pricing behavior of the security and helps estimate the fluctuations that may happen in a short period of time.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (17.2%) in the period of the last 5 years, the 30 days standard deviation of 19.1% of iShares Global Materials ETF is higher, thus worse.
• Looking at volatility in of 17.8% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (16.1%).

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 deviation of 13.1% in the last 5 years of iShares Global Materials ETF, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (11.7%)
• Looking at downside volatility in of 11.9% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (10.5%).

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 risk / return profile (Sharpe) over 5 years of iShares Global Materials ETF is 0.35, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.87) in the same period.
• Looking at Sharpe Ratio in of 0.47 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (1.23).

Sortino:

'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.'

• The ratio of annual return and downside deviation over 5 years of iShares Global Materials ETF is 0.51, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (1.28) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the downside risk / excess return profile is 0.7, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of 1.87 from the benchmark.

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 Index over 5 years of iShares Global Materials ETF is 9.57 , which is greater, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (8.41 ) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the Ulcer Ratio is 7.04 , which is higher, thus worse than the value of 3.62 from the benchmark.

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.'

• The maximum drop from peak to valley over 5 years of iShares Global Materials ETF is -28.8 days, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (-24.5 days) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (-18.8 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum DrawDown of -22.3 days is lower, thus worse.

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 492 days of iShares Global Materials ETF is greater, thus worse.
• Looking at maximum days below previous high in of 238 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, 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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (121 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the average time in days below previous high water mark of 150 days of iShares Global Materials ETF is greater, thus worse.
• Looking at average days below previous high in of 84 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to SPY (21 days).