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%)
- World Top 4 Strategy (WTOP4) (0% to 100%)
- Global Sector Rotation Strategy (GSRS) (0% to 100%)
- Global Market Rotation Strategy (GMRS) (0% to 100%)
- Maximum Yield Strategy (MYRS) (0% to 100%)
- NASDAQ 100 Strategy (NAS100) (0% to 100%)
- Leveraged Gold-Currency Strategy (GLD-USD) (0% to 100%)
- US Sector Rotation Strategy (USSECT) (0% to 100%)
- Leveraged Universal Investment Strategy (UISx3) (0% to 100%)
- US Market Strategy (USMarket) (0% to 100%)
- Dow 30 Strategy (DOW30) (0% to 100%)
- Universal Investment Strategy (UIS) (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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (66.2%) in the period of the last 5 years, the total return, or performance of 45.3% of Minimum Volatility Portfolio is lower, thus worse.
- Looking at total return, or increase in value in of 25.3% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (47.5%).

'Compound annual growth rate (CAGR) is a business and investing specific term for the geometric progression ratio that provides a constant rate of return over the time period. CAGR is not an accounting term, but it is often used to describe some element of the business, for example revenue, units delivered, registered users, etc. CAGR dampens the effect of volatility of periodic returns that can render arithmetic means irrelevant. It is particularly useful to compare growth rates from various data sets of common domain such as revenue growth of companies in the same industry.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- The compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) over 5 years of Minimum Volatility Portfolio is 7.8%, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (10.7%) in the same period.
- Compared with SPY (13.9%) in the period of the last 3 years, the annual performance (CAGR) of 7.8% is lower, thus worse.

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Looking at the historical 30 days volatility of 5.3% in the last 5 years of Minimum Volatility Portfolio, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (13.3%)
- Looking at 30 days standard deviation in of 4.8% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to SPY (12.5%).

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (14.6%) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside deviation of 6% of Minimum Volatility Portfolio is lower, thus better.
- During the last 3 years, the downside volatility is 5.7%, which is smaller, thus better than the value of 14.2% 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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.62) in the period of the last 5 years, the ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) of 0.99 of Minimum Volatility Portfolio is larger, thus better.
- Looking at Sharpe Ratio in of 1.1 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to SPY (0.91).

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.56) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside risk / excess return profile of 0.88 of Minimum Volatility Portfolio is greater, thus better.
- During the last 3 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation is 0.93, which is higher, thus better than the value of 0.8 from the benchmark.

'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:- The Ulcer Index over 5 years of Minimum Volatility Portfolio is 2.13 , which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (3.96 ) in the same period.
- Compared with SPY (4.01 ) in the period of the last 3 years, the Ulcer Index of 2.01 is smaller, 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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Looking at the maximum drop from peak to valley of -6.8 days in the last 5 years of Minimum Volatility Portfolio, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (-19.3 days)
- During the last 3 years, the maximum reduction from previous high is -5.3 days, which is greater, thus better than the value of -19.3 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'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Looking at the maximum days under water of 252 days in the last 5 years of Minimum Volatility Portfolio, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (187 days)
- Looking at maximum days under water in of 252 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (139 days).

'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 below previous high of 59 days in the last 5 years of Minimum Volatility Portfolio, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (41 days)
- During the last 3 years, the average days under water is 61 days, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 36 days from the benchmark.

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.

()

- "Year" returns in the table above are not equal to 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.