'Total return is the amount of value an investor earns from a security over a specific period, typically one year, when all distributions are reinvested. Total return is expressed as a percentage of the amount invested. For example, a total return of 20% means the security increased by 20% of its original value due to a price increase, distribution of dividends (if a stock), coupons (if a bond) or capital gains (if a fund). Total return is a strong measure of an investment’s overall performance.'

Which means for our asset as example:- Looking at the total return of 11.5% in the last 5 years of , we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (65.8%)
- Compared with SPY (48.8%) in the period of the last 3 years, the total return, or increase in value of 6.5% is lower, thus worse.

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- The annual return (CAGR) over 5 years of is 2.2%, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (10.6%) in the same period.
- Compared with SPY (14.2%) in the period of the last 3 years, the annual performance (CAGR) of 2.1% 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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Looking at the historical 30 days volatility of 1.5% in the last 5 years of , we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (13.6%)
- During the last 3 years, the 30 days standard deviation is 1.5%, which is lower, thus better than the value of 12.8% 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:- Looking at the downside volatility of 2% in the last 5 years of , we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (15%)
- Compared with SPY (14.6%) in the period of the last 3 years, the downside deviation of 2% is lower, thus better.

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.6) in the period of the last 5 years, the risk / return profile (Sharpe) of -0.19 of is smaller, thus worse.
- Looking at ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) in of -0.27 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to SPY (0.91).

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- Looking at the excess return divided by the downside deviation of -0.15 in the last 5 years of , we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.54)
- Looking at ratio of annual return and downside deviation in of -0.2 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to SPY (0.8).

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- The Downside risk index over 5 years of is 0.5 , which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (4.03 ) in the same period.
- During the last 3 years, the Downside risk index is 0.59 , which is smaller, thus better than the value of 4.1 from the benchmark.

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (-19.3 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum DrawDown of -1.5 days of is higher, thus better.
- During the last 3 years, the maximum reduction from previous high is -1.5 days, which is larger, thus better than the value of -19.3 days from the benchmark.

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- The maximum time in days below previous high water mark over 5 years of is 320 days, which is larger, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (187 days) in the same period.
- During the last 3 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark is 320 days, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 139 days from the benchmark.

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- The average days under water over 5 years of is 70 days, which is larger, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (41 days) in the same period.
- Compared with SPY (35 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the average days under water of 92 days is greater, thus worse.

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

- "Year" returns in the table above are not equal to the sum of monthly returns due to compounding.
- Performance results of 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.