iShares MSCI Thailand ETF (THD)

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.'

• The total return, or performance over 5 years of iShares MSCI Thailand ETF is -22.3%, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (60.6%) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the total return, or performance is 6.4%, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of 38% from the benchmark.

CAGR:

'The compound annual growth rate isn't a true return rate, but rather a representational figure. It is essentially a number that describes the rate at which an investment would have grown if it had grown the same rate every year and the profits were reinvested at the end of each year. In reality, this sort of performance is unlikely. However, CAGR can be used to smooth returns so that they may be more easily understood when compared to alternative investments.'

• Looking at the annual performance (CAGR) of -4.9% in the last 5 years of iShares MSCI Thailand ETF, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (10%)
• Looking at annual performance (CAGR) in of 2.1% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to SPY (11.3%).

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.'

• The historical 30 days volatility over 5 years of iShares MSCI Thailand ETF is 23.6%, which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (21.5%) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the volatility is 18.4%, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 17.9% from the benchmark.

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 (15.5%) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside volatility of 17.6% of iShares MSCI Thailand ETF is greater, thus worse.
• Looking at downside volatility in of 12.7% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (12.5%).

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 ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) of -0.32 in the last 5 years of iShares MSCI Thailand ETF, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.35)
• Compared with SPY (0.49) in the period of the last 3 years, the Sharpe Ratio of -0.02 is lower, thus worse.

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.'

• Looking at the excess return divided by the downside deviation of -0.42 in the last 5 years of iShares MSCI Thailand ETF, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.48)
• Compared with SPY (0.71) in the period of the last 3 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of -0.03 is lower, thus worse.

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.'

• Looking at the Ulcer Index of 18 in the last 5 years of iShares MSCI Thailand ETF, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (9.55 )
• Compared with SPY (10 ) in the period of the last 3 years, the Downside risk index of 9.67 is lower, thus better.

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.'

• Looking at the maximum reduction from previous high of -48.5 days in the last 5 years of iShares MSCI Thailand ETF, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (-33.7 days)
• Looking at maximum reduction from previous high in of -21.4 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to SPY (-24.5 days).

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'

• The maximum time in days below previous high water mark over 5 years of iShares MSCI Thailand ETF is 1062 days, which is greater, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (431 days) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark is 222 days, which is lower, thus better than the value of 431 days from the benchmark.

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 (105 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the average days under water of 465 days of iShares MSCI Thailand ETF is larger, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the average days under water is 78 days, which is lower, thus better than the value of 144 days from the benchmark.