Gold-Currency Strategy II

TotalReturn:

'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.'

• Compared with the benchmark GLD (153.2%) in the period of the last 5 years, the total return, or increase in value of 109.9% of Gold-Currency Strategy II is lower, thus worse.
• Looking at total return, or increase in value in of 109% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to GLD (124.9%).

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 16% in the last 5 years of Gold-Currency Strategy II, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark GLD (20.5%)
• Looking at annual return (CAGR) in of 28% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to GLD (31.2%).

Volatility:

'Volatility is a rate at which the price of a security increases or decreases for a given set of returns. Volatility is measured by calculating the standard deviation of the annualized returns over a given period of time. It shows the range to which the price of a security may increase or decrease. Volatility measures the risk of a security. It is used in option pricing formula to gauge the fluctuations in the returns of the underlying assets. Volatility indicates the pricing behavior of the security and helps estimate the fluctuations that may happen in a short period of time.'

• Compared with the benchmark GLD (17.5%) in the period of the last 5 years, the historical 30 days volatility of 14.6% of Gold-Currency Strategy II is smaller, thus better.
• During the last 3 years, the volatility is 18.1%, which is lower, thus better than the value of 19.2% from the benchmark.

DownVol:

'The downside volatility is similar to the volatility, or standard deviation, but only takes losing/negative periods into account.'

• Compared with the benchmark GLD (12.3%) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside risk of 10.5% of Gold-Currency Strategy II is smaller, thus better.
• During the last 3 years, the downside risk is 12.9%, which is smaller, thus better than the value of 13.6% from the benchmark.

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark GLD (1.03) in the period of the last 5 years, the risk / return profile (Sharpe) of 0.93 of Gold-Currency Strategy II is smaller, thus worse.
• Compared with GLD (1.49) in the period of the last 3 years, the ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) of 1.41 is smaller, thus worse.

Sortino:

'The Sortino ratio measures the risk-adjusted return of an investment asset, portfolio, or strategy. It is a modification of the Sharpe ratio but penalizes only those returns falling below a user-specified target or required rate of return, while the Sharpe ratio penalizes both upside and downside volatility equally. Though both ratios measure an investment's risk-adjusted return, they do so in significantly different ways that will frequently lead to differing conclusions as to the true nature of the investment's return-generating efficiency. The Sortino ratio is used as a way to compare the risk-adjusted performance of programs with differing risk and return profiles. In general, risk-adjusted returns seek to normalize the risk across programs and then see which has the higher return unit per risk.'

• Compared with the benchmark GLD (1.47) in the period of the last 5 years, the excess return divided by the downside deviation of 1.29 of Gold-Currency Strategy II is smaller, thus worse.
• Looking at excess return divided by the downside deviation in of 1.97 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to GLD (2.11).

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 Downside risk index over 5 years of Gold-Currency Strategy II is 6.57 , which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark GLD (7.1 ) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the Ulcer Ratio is 3.85 , which is lower, thus better than the value of 4.04 from the benchmark.

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark GLD (-21 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum DrawDown of -16.6 days of Gold-Currency Strategy II is greater, thus better.
• Looking at maximum drop from peak to valley in of -16.6 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus better in comparison to GLD (-16.6 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). 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'

• Compared with the benchmark GLD (436 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum days under water of 590 days of Gold-Currency Strategy II is higher, thus worse.
• Compared with GLD (145 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum days under water of 227 days is larger, thus worse.

AveDuration:

'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.'

• The average time in days below previous high water mark over 5 years of Gold-Currency Strategy II is 164 days, which is larger, thus worse compared to the benchmark GLD (107 days) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the average days under water is 50 days, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 29 days from the benchmark.