NASDAQ 100 Low Volatility Sub-strategy

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.'

• The total return, or increase in value over 5 years of NASDAQ 100 Low Volatility Sub-strategy is 34.4%, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark QQQ (114.3%) in the same period.
• Looking at total return in of -2.5% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to QQQ (119%).

CAGR:

'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.'

• The compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) over 5 years of NASDAQ 100 Low Volatility Sub-strategy is 6.1%, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark QQQ (16.5%) in the same period.
• Compared with QQQ (30%) in the period of the last 3 years, the annual performance (CAGR) of -0.8% is lower, thus worse.

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.'

• Looking at the 30 days standard deviation of 14% in the last 5 years of NASDAQ 100 Low Volatility Sub-strategy, we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to the benchmark QQQ (22.4%)
• During the last 3 years, the historical 30 days volatility is 13.8%, which is lower, thus better than the value of 19.7% from the benchmark.

DownVol:

'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 volatility of 9.8% in the last 5 years of NASDAQ 100 Low Volatility Sub-strategy, we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to the benchmark QQQ (15.5%)
• Looking at downside risk in of 9.8% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to QQQ (13.2%).

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 Low Volatility Sub-strategy is 0.26, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark QQQ (0.63) in the same period.
• Looking at Sharpe Ratio in of -0.24 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to QQQ (1.4).

Sortino:

'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.'

• Compared with the benchmark QQQ (0.9) in the period of the last 5 years, the excess return divided by the downside deviation of 0.37 of NASDAQ 100 Low Volatility Sub-strategy is smaller, thus worse.
• Looking at excess return divided by the downside deviation in of -0.34 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to QQQ (2.08).

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 Ratio over 5 years of NASDAQ 100 Low Volatility Sub-strategy is 6.45 , which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark QQQ (14 ) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the Ulcer Ratio is 7.54 , which is larger, thus worse than the value of 4.85 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.'

• The maximum drop from peak to valley over 5 years of NASDAQ 100 Low Volatility Sub-strategy is -15.2 days, which is higher, thus better compared to the benchmark QQQ (-35.1 days) in the same period.
• Compared with QQQ (-22.8 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum drop from peak to valley of -15.2 days is larger, thus better.

MaxDuration:

'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.'

• Compared with the benchmark QQQ (493 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum days below previous high of 387 days of NASDAQ 100 Low Volatility Sub-strategy is smaller, thus better.
• Compared with QQQ (113 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum days below previous high of 387 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 (125 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the average days under water of 107 days of NASDAQ 100 Low Volatility Sub-strategy is smaller, thus better.
• Compared with QQQ (31 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the average time in days below previous high water mark of 154 days is larger, thus worse.