The NASDAQ 100 leaders is a sub-strategy that uses proprietary risk-adjusted momentum to pick the most appropriate 4 NASDAQ 100 stocks. It is part for the Nasdaq 100 hedged strategy where it is combined with a variable hedge.

The model chooses four individual stocks from the NASDAQ 100 stock index. So depending on what stocks are in the NASDAQ 100, the stock rotation formula might include the new ones.

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- The total return, or performance over 5 years of NASDAQ 100 Leaders Sub-strategy is 506.8%, which is larger, thus better compared to the benchmark QQQ (97.6%) in the same period.
- Compared with QQQ (31.8%) in the period of the last 3 years, the total return, or performance of 68.7% is larger, thus better.

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- The compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) over 5 years of NASDAQ 100 Leaders Sub-strategy is 43.5%, which is greater, thus better compared to the benchmark QQQ (14.6%) in the same period.
- Looking at annual return (CAGR) in of 19.1% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to QQQ (9.7%).

'Volatility is a statistical measure of the dispersion of returns for a given security or market index. Volatility can either be measured by using the standard deviation or variance between returns from that same security or market index. Commonly, the higher the volatility, the riskier the security. In the securities markets, volatility is often associated with big swings in either direction. For example, when the stock market rises and falls more than one percent over a sustained period of time, it is called a 'volatile' market.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Looking at the 30 days standard deviation of 37.5% in the last 5 years of NASDAQ 100 Leaders Sub-strategy, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark QQQ (26.2%)
- During the last 3 years, the historical 30 days volatility is 36.8%, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 24.1% 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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- Looking at the downside volatility of 25.7% in the last 5 years of NASDAQ 100 Leaders Sub-strategy, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark QQQ (18.7%)
- Compared with QQQ (16.9%) in the period of the last 3 years, the downside risk of 25.5% is higher, thus worse.

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- The ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) over 5 years of NASDAQ 100 Leaders Sub-strategy is 1.09, which is higher, thus better compared to the benchmark QQQ (0.46) in the same period.
- During the last 3 years, the Sharpe Ratio is 0.45, which is greater, thus better than the value of 0.3 from the benchmark.

'The Sortino ratio improves upon the Sharpe ratio by isolating downside volatility from total volatility by dividing excess return by the downside deviation. The Sortino ratio is a variation of the Sharpe ratio that differentiates harmful volatility from total overall volatility by using the asset's standard deviation of negative asset returns, called downside deviation. The Sortino ratio takes the asset's return and subtracts the risk-free rate, and then divides that amount by the asset's downside deviation. The ratio was named after Frank A. Sortino.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- The excess return divided by the downside deviation over 5 years of NASDAQ 100 Leaders Sub-strategy is 1.6, which is higher, thus better compared to the benchmark QQQ (0.65) in the same period.
- During the last 3 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation is 0.65, which is greater, thus better than the value of 0.42 from the benchmark.

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Looking at the Ulcer Index of 21 in the last 5 years of NASDAQ 100 Leaders Sub-strategy, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark QQQ (14 )
- Looking at Ulcer Ratio in of 26 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to QQQ (17 ).

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- 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)
- During the last 3 years, the maximum reduction from previous high is -45.1 days, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of -35.1 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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Looking at the maximum days below previous high of 468 days in the last 5 years of NASDAQ 100 Leaders Sub-strategy, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark QQQ (444 days)
- During the last 3 years, the maximum days below previous high is 468 days, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 444 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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Compared with the benchmark QQQ (106 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the average days below previous high of 119 days of NASDAQ 100 Leaders Sub-strategy is greater, thus worse.
- During the last 3 years, the average days below previous high is 173 days, which is higher, thus worse than the value of 149 days from the benchmark.

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

Allocations and holdings shown below are delayed by one month.

Register now to get the current trading allocations.

- Note that yearly returns do not equal the sum of monthly returns due to compounding.
- Performance results of NASDAQ 100 Leaders Sub-strategy 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.