NASDAQ 100 Leaders Sub-strategy

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.'

• The total return, or performance over 5 years of NASDAQ 100 Leaders Sub-strategy is 177.9%, which is higher, thus better compared to the benchmark QQQ (116.3%) in the same period.
• Compared with QQQ (119.3%) in the period of the last 3 years, the total return, or increase in value of 127.9% is greater, thus better.

CAGR:

'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.'

• The annual performance (CAGR) over 5 years of NASDAQ 100 Leaders Sub-strategy is 22.8%, which is greater, thus better compared to the benchmark QQQ (16.8%) in the same period.
• Looking at annual performance (CAGR) in of 31.8% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus better in comparison to QQQ (30.1%).

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 30 days standard deviation over 5 years of NASDAQ 100 Leaders Sub-strategy is 32.2%, which is greater, thus worse compared to the benchmark QQQ (22.4%) in the same period.
• Looking at volatility in of 32% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to QQQ (19.7%).

DownVol:

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

• The downside deviation over 5 years of NASDAQ 100 Leaders Sub-strategy is 22%, which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark QQQ (15.5%) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the downside risk is 22%, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 13.2% 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.'

• The ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) over 5 years of NASDAQ 100 Leaders Sub-strategy is 0.63, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark QQQ (0.64) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) is 0.92, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 1.4 from the benchmark.

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.'

• The ratio of annual return and downside deviation over 5 years of NASDAQ 100 Leaders Sub-strategy is 0.92, which is greater, thus better compared to the benchmark QQQ (0.92) in the same period.
• Compared with QQQ (2.09) in the period of the last 3 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of 1.33 is lower, thus worse.

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 NASDAQ 100 Leaders Sub-strategy is 23 , which is larger, thus worse compared to the benchmark QQQ (14 ) in the same period.
• Looking at Ulcer Ratio in of 18 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to QQQ (4.85 ).

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 -45.1 days in the last 5 years of NASDAQ 100 Leaders Sub-strategy, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark QQQ (-35.1 days)
• Compared with QQQ (-22.8 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum DrawDown of -35.5 days is smaller, thus worse.

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'

• The maximum time in days below previous high water mark over 5 years of NASDAQ 100 Leaders Sub-strategy is 507 days, which is larger, thus worse compared to the benchmark QQQ (493 days) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark is 486 days, which is higher, thus worse than the value of 113 days from the benchmark.

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark QQQ (125 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the average days below previous high of 210 days of NASDAQ 100 Leaders Sub-strategy is larger, thus worse.
• Looking at average days under water in of 175 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to QQQ (31 days).