'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- The total return, or performance over 5 years of Global X Fertilizers/Potash ETF is -11.5%, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (99.9%) in the same period.
- During the last 3 years, the total return, or increase in value is -10.5%, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of 35% from the benchmark.

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- The compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) over 5 years of Global X Fertilizers/Potash ETF is -2.5%, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (14.9%) in the same period.
- Looking at compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) in of -3.7% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to SPY (10.5%).

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Looking at the historical 30 days volatility of 22.4% in the last 5 years of Global X Fertilizers/Potash ETF, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (20.9%)
- Compared with SPY (17.3%) in the period of the last 3 years, the volatility of 24.4% is higher, thus worse.

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (15%) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside risk of 16.6% of Global X Fertilizers/Potash ETF is greater, thus worse.
- During the last 3 years, the downside deviation is 18.3%, which is higher, thus worse than the value of 12% from the benchmark.

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Looking at the ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) of -0.22 in the last 5 years of Global X Fertilizers/Potash ETF, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.59)
- Compared with SPY (0.47) in the period of the last 3 years, the ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) of -0.25 is lower, thus worse.

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.83) in the period of the last 5 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of -0.3 of Global X Fertilizers/Potash ETF is lower, thus worse.
- Looking at downside risk / excess return profile in of -0.34 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (0.67).

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- The Ulcer Index over 5 years of Global X Fertilizers/Potash ETF is 16 , which is larger, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (9.32 ) in the same period.
- During the last 3 years, the Downside risk index is 18 , which is greater, thus worse than the value of 10 from the benchmark.

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (-33.7 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum drop from peak to valley of -50.3 days of Global X Fertilizers/Potash ETF is lower, thus worse.
- Looking at maximum reduction from previous high in of -50.3 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (-24.5 days).

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- The maximum days below previous high over 5 years of Global X Fertilizers/Potash ETF is 642 days, which is larger, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (488 days) in the same period.
- During the last 3 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark is 642 days, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 488 days from the benchmark.

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (124 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the average days below previous high of 267 days of Global X Fertilizers/Potash ETF is larger, thus worse.
- During the last 3 years, the average time in days below previous high water mark is 287 days, which is higher, thus worse than the value of 181 days from the benchmark.

Historical returns have been extended using synthetic data.
[Show Details]

- Note that yearly returns do not equal the sum of monthly returns due to compounding.
- Performance results of Global X Fertilizers/Potash ETF are hypothetical and do not account for slippage, fees or taxes.