Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW)

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 -38.4% in the last 5 years of Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (90%)
• During the last 3 years, the total return, or performance is 19.3%, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 86% 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 (13.7%) in the period of the last 5 years, the annual performance (CAGR) of -9.3% of Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF is lower, thus worse.
• Looking at annual return (CAGR) in of 6.1% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to SPY (23.1%).

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%) in the period of the last 5 years, the volatility of 42.7% of Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF is greater, thus worse.
• Looking at volatility in of 40.1% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (15.1%).

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 volatility of 29.2% in the last 5 years of Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (11.7%)
• During the last 3 years, the downside risk is 27%, which is higher, thus worse than the value of 10.1% from the benchmark.

Sharpe:

'The Sharpe ratio is the measure of risk-adjusted return of a financial portfolio. Sharpe ratio is a measure of excess portfolio return over the risk-free rate relative to its standard deviation. Normally, the 90-day Treasury bill rate is taken as the proxy for risk-free rate. A portfolio with a higher Sharpe ratio is considered superior relative to its peers. The measure was named after William F Sharpe, a Nobel laureate and professor of finance, emeritus at Stanford University.'

• Looking at the risk / return profile (Sharpe) of -0.28 in the last 5 years of Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.66)
• During the last 3 years, the Sharpe Ratio is 0.09, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 1.36 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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.96) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside risk / excess return profile of -0.4 of Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF is lower, thus worse.
• Looking at excess return divided by the downside deviation in of 0.13 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (2.04).

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.'

• Looking at the Ulcer Index of 60 in the last 5 years of Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (8.44 )
• Looking at Ulcer Index in of 42 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (3.5 ).

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (-24.5 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum DrawDown of -84.5 days of Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF is smaller, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (-18.8 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum reduction from previous high of -68 days is lower, thus worse.

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'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (488 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum days under water of 1133 days of Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF is greater, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (87 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum days below previous high of 705 days is higher, thus worse.

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 522 days in the last 5 years of Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (120 days)
• During the last 3 years, the average days under water is 339 days, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 20 days from the benchmark.