VanEck Vectors Vietnam ETF (VNM)

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 over 5 years of VanEck Vectors Vietnam ETF is -23.9%, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (97.4%) in the same period.
• Looking at total return, or performance in of -39% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to SPY (44.7%).

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 return (CAGR) of -5.3% in the last 5 years of VanEck Vectors Vietnam ETF, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (14.6%)
• Compared with SPY (13.2%) in the period of the last 3 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of -15.3% is lower, thus worse.

Volatility:

'Volatility is a statistical measure of the dispersion of returns for a given security or market index. Volatility can either be measured by using the standard deviation or variance between returns from that same security or market index. Commonly, the higher the volatility, the riskier the security. In the securities markets, volatility is often associated with big swings in either direction. For example, when the stock market rises and falls more than one percent over a sustained period of time, it is called a 'volatile' market.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (21%) in the period of the last 5 years, the volatility of 24.3% of VanEck Vectors Vietnam ETF is greater, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the historical 30 days volatility is 22.5%, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 17.4% 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.'

• Looking at the downside deviation of 18.2% in the last 5 years of VanEck Vectors Vietnam ETF, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (15%)
• Compared with SPY (12.1%) in the period of the last 3 years, the downside deviation of 16.8% is greater, thus worse.

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.'

• The risk / return profile (Sharpe) over 5 years of VanEck Vectors Vietnam ETF is -0.32, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.58) in the same period.
• Looking at risk / return profile (Sharpe) in of -0.79 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to SPY (0.61).

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.'

• The ratio of annual return and downside deviation over 5 years of VanEck Vectors Vietnam ETF is -0.43, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.8) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (0.88) in the period of the last 3 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of -1.06 is smaller, thus worse.

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (9.33 ) in the period of the last 5 years, the Downside risk index of 29 of VanEck Vectors Vietnam ETF is larger, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the Ulcer Ratio is 32 , which is larger, thus worse than the value of 8.63 from the benchmark.

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.'

• The maximum drop from peak to valley over 5 years of VanEck Vectors Vietnam ETF is -49.4 days, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (-33.7 days) in the same period.
• Looking at maximum DrawDown in of -45.6 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (-22.1 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) in days.'

• Looking at the maximum time in days below previous high water mark of 764 days in the last 5 years of VanEck Vectors Vietnam ETF, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (488 days)
• Looking at maximum days under water in of 739 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (325 days).

AveDuration:

'The Average 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. 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.'

• The average days below previous high over 5 years of VanEck Vectors Vietnam ETF is 269 days, which is greater, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (122 days) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the average time in days below previous high water mark is 365 days, which is higher, thus worse than the value of 89 days from the benchmark.