Aggressive Risk Portfolio

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (90%) in the period of the last 5 years, the total return of 73.5% of Aggressive Risk Portfolio is lower, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (86%) in the period of the last 3 years, the total return of 58.6% 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.'

• Looking at the annual return (CAGR) of 11.7% in the last 5 years of Aggressive Risk Portfolio, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (13.7%)
• During the last 3 years, the annual return (CAGR) is 16.7%, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of 23.1% from the benchmark.

Volatility:

'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.'

• The volatility over 5 years of Aggressive Risk Portfolio is 13.5%, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (17%) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (15.1%) in the period of the last 3 years, the 30 days standard deviation of 12.5% is lower, thus better.

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.'

• The downside risk over 5 years of Aggressive Risk Portfolio is 9.5%, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (11.7%) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (10.1%) in the period of the last 3 years, the downside risk of 8.5% is smaller, thus better.

Sharpe:

'The Sharpe ratio is the measure of risk-adjusted return of a financial portfolio. Sharpe ratio is a measure of excess portfolio return over the risk-free rate relative to its standard deviation. Normally, the 90-day Treasury bill rate is taken as the proxy for risk-free rate. A portfolio with a higher Sharpe ratio is considered superior relative to its peers. The measure was named after William F Sharpe, a Nobel laureate and professor of finance, emeritus at Stanford University.'

• The risk / return profile (Sharpe) over 5 years of Aggressive Risk Portfolio is 0.68, which is higher, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (0.66) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the risk / return profile (Sharpe) is 1.14, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 1.36 from the benchmark.

Sortino:

'The Sortino ratio, a variation of the Sharpe ratio only factors in the downside, or negative volatility, rather than the total volatility used in calculating the Sharpe ratio. The theory behind the Sortino variation is that upside volatility is a plus for the investment, and it, therefore, should not be included in the risk calculation. Therefore, the Sortino ratio takes upside volatility out of the equation and uses only the downside standard deviation in its calculation instead of the total standard deviation that is used in calculating the Sharpe ratio.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.96) in the period of the last 5 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of 0.97 of Aggressive Risk Portfolio is greater, thus better.
• During the last 3 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation is 1.67, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 2.04 from the benchmark.

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.'

• Looking at the Downside risk index of 5.56 in the last 5 years of Aggressive Risk Portfolio, we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (8.44 )
• Compared with SPY (3.5 ) in the period of the last 3 years, the Ulcer Index of 3.91 is larger, thus worse.

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (-24.5 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum reduction from previous high of -19.6 days of Aggressive Risk Portfolio is higher, thus better.
• Compared with SPY (-18.8 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum DrawDown of -13.2 days is larger, thus better.

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'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (488 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark of 289 days of Aggressive Risk Portfolio is lower, thus better.
• Looking at maximum days under water in of 190 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to SPY (87 days).

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.'

• The average time in days below previous high water mark over 5 years of Aggressive Risk Portfolio is 65 days, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (120 days) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (20 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the average days below previous high of 43 days is greater, thus worse.