Vanguard Financials ETF (VFH)

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (107.6%) in the period of the last 5 years, the total return, or increase in value of 144.3% of Vanguard Financials ETF is greater, thus better.
• During the last 3 years, the total return, or increase in value is 55%, which is higher, thus better than the value of 48.1% 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 compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 19.6% in the last 5 years of Vanguard Financials ETF, we see it is relatively larger, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (15.8%)
• Looking at annual performance (CAGR) in of 15.8% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus better in comparison to SPY (14%).

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.'

• Looking at the 30 days standard deviation of 21.9% in the last 5 years of Vanguard Financials ETF, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (17.9%)
• Looking at 30 days standard deviation in of 20% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to SPY (18.3%).

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 (12.5%) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside volatility of 14.9% of Vanguard Financials ETF is higher, thus worse.
• Looking at downside deviation in of 13.8% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (12.4%).

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.74) in the period of the last 5 years, the risk / return profile (Sharpe) of 0.78 of Vanguard Financials ETF is higher, thus better.
• Compared with SPY (0.63) in the period of the last 3 years, the ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) of 0.66 is higher, thus better.

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (1.06) in the period of the last 5 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of 1.15 of Vanguard Financials ETF is larger, thus better.
• Compared with SPY (0.93) in the period of the last 3 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of 0.97 is larger, thus better.

Ulcer:

'The Ulcer Index is a technical indicator that measures downside risk, in terms of both the depth and duration of price declines. The index increases in value as the price moves farther away from a recent high and falls as the price rises to new highs. The indicator is usually calculated over a 14-day period, with the Ulcer Index showing the percentage drawdown a trader can expect from the high over that period. The greater the value of the Ulcer Index, the longer it takes for a stock to get back to the former high.'

• The Ulcer Index over 5 years of Vanguard Financials ETF is 11 , which is larger, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (8.48 ) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the Ulcer Index is 6.99 , which is greater, thus worse than the value of 5.54 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 DrawDown over 5 years of Vanguard Financials ETF is -25.7 days, which is lower, 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 drop from peak to valley of -17.3 days is greater, thus better.

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 days below previous high of 528 days of Vanguard Financials ETF is greater, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (199 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum days below previous high of 212 days is larger, 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 days under water of 135 days in the last 5 years of Vanguard Financials ETF, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (119 days)
• Compared with SPY (45 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the average days under water of 46 days is higher, thus worse.