This portfolio has been optimized for achieving the lowest possible historical volatility over the analyzed period with the involved assets. As such, it exhibits the least risk of all our portfolios, and is therefore suited especially for very risk adverse investors with conservative growth expectations.

Please note that this portfolio might use leveraged ETF and single stocks. Should these not be allowed in your retirement account please see our 401k and IRS compatible Conservative, Moderate, and Aggressive Risk Portfolios. Contact us for special requirements.

While this portfolio provides an optimized asset allocation based on historical returns, your investment objectives, risk profile and personal experience are important factors when deciding on the best investment vehicle for yourself. You can also use the Portfolio Builder or Portfolio Optimizer to construct your own personalized portfolio.

Assets and weight constraints used in the optimizer process:

- Bond ETF Rotation Strategy (BRS) (0% to 100%)
- BUG Permanent Portfolio Strategy (BUG) (0% to 100%)
- Leveraged Gold-Currency Strategy (GLD-USD) (0% to 100%)
- Global Market Rotation Strategy (GMRS) (0% to 100%)
- Global Sector Rotation Strategy (GSRS) (0% to 100%)
- Maximum Yield Strategy (MYRS) (0% to 100%)
- Universal Investment Strategy (UIS) (0% to 100%)
- Universal Investment Strategy 2x Leverage (UISx2) (0% to 100%)
- US Market Strategy (USMarket) (0% to 100%)
- US Market Strategy 2x Leverage (USMx2) (0% to 100%)
- US Sector Rotation Strategy (USSECT) (0% to 100%)
- World Top 4 Strategy (WTOP4) (0% to 100%)

'Total return, when measuring performance, is the actual rate of return of an investment or a pool of investments over a given evaluation period. Total return includes interest, capital gains, dividends and distributions realized over a given period of time. Total return accounts for two categories of return: income including interest paid by fixed-income investments, distributions or dividends and capital appreciation, representing the change in the market price of an asset.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Looking at the total return of 30.7% in the last 5 years of Minimum Volatility Portfolio, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (124.9%)
- During the last 3 years, the total return, or increase in value is 16.8%, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 60.5% 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 annual performance (CAGR) over 5 years of Minimum Volatility Portfolio is 5.5%, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (17.6%) in the same period.
- Looking at annual return (CAGR) in of 5.3% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (17.1%).

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- The 30 days standard deviation over 5 years of Minimum Volatility Portfolio is 5.1%, which is smaller, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (18.7%) in the same period.
- During the last 3 years, the volatility is 5.9%, which is smaller, thus better than the value of 22.6% from the benchmark.

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (13.5%) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside volatility of 3.7% of Minimum Volatility Portfolio is smaller, thus better.
- During the last 3 years, the downside deviation is 4.4%, which is lower, thus better than the value of 16.4% from the benchmark.

'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 (0.81) in the period of the last 5 years, the Sharpe Ratio of 0.6 of Minimum Volatility Portfolio is lower, thus worse.
- During the last 3 years, the Sharpe Ratio is 0.48, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 0.65 from the benchmark.

'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:- Looking at the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of 0.81 in the last 5 years of Minimum Volatility Portfolio, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (1.12)
- During the last 3 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation is 0.64, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 0.89 from the benchmark.

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Looking at the Ulcer Index of 2.05 in the last 5 years of Minimum Volatility Portfolio, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (5.58 )
- During the last 3 years, the Ulcer Index is 2.55 , which is lower, thus better than the value of 6.82 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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (-33.7 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum drop from peak to valley of -10.9 days of Minimum Volatility Portfolio is greater, thus better.
- During the last 3 years, the maximum drop from peak to valley is -10.9 days, which is greater, thus better than the value of -33.7 days from the benchmark.

'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'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- The maximum days under water over 5 years of Minimum Volatility Portfolio is 240 days, which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (139 days) in the same period.
- Looking at maximum days below previous high in of 240 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (128 days).

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (32 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the average days under water of 47 days of Minimum Volatility Portfolio is higher, thus worse.
- Looking at average days under water in of 62 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (33 days).

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

Allocations and holdings shown below are delayed by one month. To see current trading allocations of Minimum Volatility Portfolio, register now.

()

- Note that yearly returns do not equal the sum of monthly returns due to compounding.
- Performance results of Minimum Volatility Portfolio 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.