This strategy selects the top three performers from our core strategies, based on the most recent 6 month performance, and allocates one third to each of them.

Note that very often the strategy will invest in the more aggressive of our strategies, which might not be suitable for all investors. You can create your version of this strategy with our Portfolio Builder. Simply select the top 2, 3, or 4 strategies and assign equal weights to each or adjust your allocations for your risk level. You will need to manually review and update the top performers periodically.

All of our current strategies are included in the algorithm.

'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:- The total return over 5 years of Top 3 Strategies is 94.6%, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (116.9%) in the same period.
- Compared with SPY (63.4%) in the period of the last 3 years, the total return, or performance of 41.8% is lower, thus worse.

'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:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (16.8%) in the period of the last 5 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 14.3% of Top 3 Strategies is smaller, thus worse.
- Compared with SPY (17.8%) in the period of the last 3 years, the annual performance (CAGR) of 12.3% 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 8.8% in the last 5 years of Top 3 Strategies, we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (18.7%)
- During the last 3 years, the 30 days standard deviation is 10.1%, which is lower, thus better than the value of 22.5% from the benchmark.

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

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- The downside deviation over 5 years of Top 3 Strategies is 6.2%, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (13.6%) in the same period.
- Compared with SPY (16.3%) in the period of the last 3 years, the downside deviation of 7.2% 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:- Looking at the ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) of 1.34 in the last 5 years of Top 3 Strategies, we see it is relatively larger, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.76)
- Compared with SPY (0.68) in the period of the last 3 years, the Sharpe Ratio of 0.97 is larger, thus better.

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Looking at the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of 1.88 in the last 5 years of Top 3 Strategies, we see it is relatively larger, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (1.05)
- Compared with SPY (0.94) in the period of the last 3 years, the excess return divided by the downside deviation of 1.36 is higher, thus better.

'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:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (5.58 ) in the period of the last 5 years, the Downside risk index of 1.82 of Top 3 Strategies is smaller, thus better.
- Looking at Downside risk index in of 2.17 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to SPY (6.83 ).

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (-33.7 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum reduction from previous high of -14.3 days of Top 3 Strategies is greater, thus better.
- Compared with SPY (-33.7 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum reduction from previous high of -14.3 days is greater, thus better.

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- The maximum days under water over 5 years of Top 3 Strategies is 93 days, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (139 days) in the same period.
- During the last 3 years, the maximum days under water is 93 days, which is smaller, thus better 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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- The average days below previous high over 5 years of Top 3 Strategies is 21 days, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (33 days) in the same period.
- During the last 3 years, the average time in days below previous high water mark is 23 days, which is smaller, thus better than the value of 35 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 Top 3 Strategies, register now.

()

- Note that yearly returns do not equal the sum of monthly returns due to compounding.
- Performance results of Top 3 Strategies 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.