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 over 5 years of NASDAQ 100 Leaders Sub-strategy is 134.7%, which is larger, thus better compared to the benchmark QQQ (105.3%) in the same period.
• Compared with QQQ (125.1%) in the period of the last 3 years, the total return, or performance of 102% is lower, thus worse.

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.'

• The annual performance (CAGR) over 5 years of NASDAQ 100 Leaders Sub-strategy is 18.7%, which is greater, thus better compared to the benchmark QQQ (15.5%) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the annual performance (CAGR) is 26.5%, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 31.2% from the benchmark.

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark QQQ (22.6%) in the period of the last 5 years, the historical 30 days volatility of 33.6% of NASDAQ 100 Leaders Sub-strategy is larger, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the 30 days standard deviation is 30.4%, which is greater, thus worse 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.'

• Looking at the downside deviation of 23.5% 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 (15.7%)
• Compared with QQQ (13.2%) in the period of the last 3 years, the downside volatility of 20.7% is greater, thus worse.

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 risk / return profile (Sharpe) over 5 years of NASDAQ 100 Leaders Sub-strategy is 0.48, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark QQQ (0.58) in the same period.
• Compared with QQQ (1.44) in the period of the last 3 years, the ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) of 0.79 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 QQQ (0.83) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside risk / excess return profile of 0.69 of NASDAQ 100 Leaders Sub-strategy is smaller, thus worse.
• Looking at ratio of annual return and downside deviation in of 1.16 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to QQQ (2.17).

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 NASDAQ 100 Leaders Sub-strategy is 24 , which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark QQQ (14 ) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the Ulcer Ratio is 18 , which is greater, thus worse than the value of 4.69 from the benchmark.

MaxDD:

'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.'

• Looking at the maximum DrawDown 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 drop from peak to valley is -35.5 days, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of -22.8 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 QQQ (493 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum days below previous high of 507 days of NASDAQ 100 Leaders Sub-strategy is greater, thus worse.
• Compared with QQQ (85 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum days under water of 412 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.'

• Compared with the benchmark QQQ (121 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the average days under water of 191 days of NASDAQ 100 Leaders Sub-strategy is larger, thus worse.
• Compared with QQQ (25 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the average days below previous high of 131 days is higher, thus worse.