'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- The total return, or performance over 5 years of Invesco S&P 500 Low Volatility ETF is 64.4%, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (88%) in the same period.
- Looking at total return, or increase in value in of 23.6% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to SPY (39.5%).

'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 annual return (CAGR) over 5 years of Invesco S&P 500 Low Volatility ETF is 10.4%, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (13.5%) in the same period.
- During the last 3 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) is 7.3%, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 11.7% from the benchmark.

'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:- The volatility over 5 years of Invesco S&P 500 Low Volatility ETF is 17.9%, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (18.8%) in the same period.
- Compared with SPY (22.3%) in the period of the last 3 years, the 30 days standard deviation of 21.6% is smaller, thus better.

'The downside volatility is similar to the volatility, or standard deviation, but only takes losing/negative periods into account.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (13.7%) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside deviation of 13% of Invesco S&P 500 Low Volatility ETF is lower, thus better.
- Looking at downside deviation in of 15.8% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to SPY (16.5%).

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.58) in the period of the last 5 years, the Sharpe Ratio of 0.44 of Invesco S&P 500 Low Volatility ETF is smaller, thus worse.
- During the last 3 years, the ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) is 0.22, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 0.41 from the benchmark.

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Looking at the downside risk / excess return profile of 0.61 in the last 5 years of Invesco S&P 500 Low Volatility ETF, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.8)
- Looking at ratio of annual return and downside deviation in of 0.3 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to SPY (0.56).

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (5.79 ) in the period of the last 5 years, the Ulcer Ratio of 6.65 of Invesco S&P 500 Low Volatility ETF is higher, thus worse.
- Compared with SPY (7.08 ) in the period of the last 3 years, the Ulcer Ratio of 8.32 is larger, thus worse.

'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:- The maximum DrawDown over 5 years of Invesco S&P 500 Low Volatility ETF is -36.3 days, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (-33.7 days) in the same period.
- Compared with SPY (-33.7 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum drop from peak to valley of -36.3 days is lower, thus worse.

'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'

Which means for our asset as example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (139 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum days under water of 155 days of Invesco S&P 500 Low Volatility ETF is greater, thus worse.
- During the last 3 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark is 155 days, which is higher, thus worse than the value of 139 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:- Looking at the average days under water of 36 days in the last 5 years of Invesco S&P 500 Low Volatility ETF, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (37 days)
- Looking at average days below previous high in of 39 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to SPY (45 days).

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 Invesco S&P 500 Low Volatility ETF are hypothetical, do not account for slippage, fees or taxes, and are based on backtesting, which has many inherent limitations, some of which are described in our Terms of Use.