Gold-Currency Strategy II

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 GLD (133.8%) in the period of the last 5 years, the total return, or performance of 112% of Gold-Currency Strategy II is lower, thus worse.
• Compared with GLD (128.8%) in the period of the last 3 years, the total return, or increase in value of 116% is lower, thus worse.

CAGR:

'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.'

• The annual return (CAGR) over 5 years of Gold-Currency Strategy II is 16.3%, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark GLD (18.6%) in the same period.
• Compared with GLD (32%) in the period of the last 3 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 29.5% is lower, thus worse.

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.'

• The historical 30 days volatility over 5 years of Gold-Currency Strategy II is 15.2%, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark GLD (18%) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the volatility is 18.7%, which is lower, thus better than the value of 19.9% 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.'

• Compared with the benchmark GLD (12.7%) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside deviation of 10.8% of Gold-Currency Strategy II is smaller, thus better.
• During the last 3 years, the downside deviation is 13.3%, which is lower, thus better than the value of 14% from the benchmark.

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 GLD (0.89) in the period of the last 5 years, the Sharpe Ratio of 0.91 of Gold-Currency Strategy II is larger, thus better.
• Compared with GLD (1.48) in the period of the last 3 years, the risk / return profile (Sharpe) of 1.44 is lower, thus worse.

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.'

• The downside risk / excess return profile over 5 years of Gold-Currency Strategy II is 1.27, which is greater, thus better compared to the benchmark GLD (1.27) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the downside risk / excess return profile is 2.03, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 2.1 from the benchmark.

Ulcer:

'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.'

• The Ulcer Index over 5 years of Gold-Currency Strategy II is 7.12 , which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark GLD (7.63 ) in the same period.
• Looking at Ulcer Ratio in of 4.71 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to GLD (4.98 ).

MaxDD:

'Maximum drawdown measures the loss in any losing period during a fund’s investment record. It is defined as the percent retrenchment from a fund’s peak value to the fund’s valley value. The drawdown is in effect from the time the fund’s retrenchment begins until a new fund high is reached. The maximum drawdown encompasses both the period from the fund’s peak to the fund’s valley (length), and the time from the fund’s valley to a new fund high (recovery). It measures the largest percentage drawdown that has occurred in any fund’s data record.'

• Looking at the maximum reduction from previous high of -19.2 days in the last 5 years of Gold-Currency Strategy II, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to the benchmark GLD (-21 days)
• During the last 3 years, the maximum reduction from previous high is -19.2 days, which is greater, thus better than the value of -19.2 days from the benchmark.

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark GLD (436 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark of 590 days of Gold-Currency Strategy II is larger, thus worse.
• Compared with GLD (101 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark of 135 days is greater, thus worse.

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 Gold-Currency Strategy II is 164 days, which is larger, thus worse compared to the benchmark GLD (108 days) in the same period.
• Compared with GLD (25 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the average days under water of 31 days is higher, thus worse.