Description

The Leveraged Gold-Currency Strategy takes advantage of the historically negative correlation between gold and the U.S. dollar. It switches between the two assets based on their recent risk adjusted performance enabling the strategy to provide protection against severe gold corrections due to dollar strength. It is an excellent addition to existing equity or bond portfolios as it holds very little correlation to either.

This version of the strategy uses inverse leveraged ETFs to generate higher returns, but some retirement accounts are restricted from trading these ETFs. GLD-UUP provides an alternate form of the strategy without leveraged ETFs which also lowers the overall return and volatility.

Statistics (YTD)

What do these metrics mean? [Read More] [Hide]

TotalReturn:

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:
  • The total return, or performance over 5 years of Leveraged Gold-Currency Strategy is 29.7%, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark GLD (47.4%) in the same period.
  • Looking at total return in of 18.9% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to GLD (43%).

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.'

Which means for our asset as example:
  • Compared with the benchmark GLD (8.1%) in the period of the last 5 years, the annual return (CAGR) of 5.4% of Leveraged Gold-Currency Strategy is smaller, thus worse.
  • Compared with GLD (12.7%) in the period of the last 3 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 5.9% is lower, thus worse.

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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:
  • Compared with the benchmark GLD (13.4%) in the period of the last 5 years, the volatility of 8.8% of Leveraged Gold-Currency Strategy is lower, thus better.
  • Compared with GLD (15.3%) in the period of the last 3 years, the historical 30 days volatility of 9.7% is lower, thus better.

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.'

Which means for our asset as example:
  • Looking at the downside risk of 6.3% in the last 5 years of Leveraged Gold-Currency Strategy, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to the benchmark GLD (9.6%)
  • Compared with GLD (11%) in the period of the last 3 years, the downside risk of 7% is smaller, thus better.

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.'

Which means for our asset as example:
  • The Sharpe Ratio over 5 years of Leveraged Gold-Currency Strategy is 0.32, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark GLD (0.42) in the same period.
  • During the last 3 years, the ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) is 0.36, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of 0.66 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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:
  • Looking at the downside risk / excess return profile of 0.45 in the last 5 years of Leveraged Gold-Currency Strategy, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark GLD (0.58)
  • During the last 3 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation is 0.49, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 0.92 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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:
  • The Ulcer Ratio over 5 years of Leveraged Gold-Currency Strategy is 3.64 , which is smaller, thus better compared to the benchmark GLD (7.63 ) in the same period.
  • Compared with GLD (8.35 ) in the period of the last 3 years, the Downside risk index of 3.69 is lower, thus better.

MaxDD:

'Maximum drawdown is defined as the peak-to-trough decline of an investment during a specific period. It is usually quoted as a percentage of the peak value. The maximum drawdown can be calculated based on absolute returns, in order to identify strategies that suffer less during market downturns, such as low-volatility strategies. However, the maximum drawdown can also be calculated based on returns relative to a benchmark index, for identifying strategies that show steady outperformance over time.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:
  • Compared with the benchmark GLD (-18.8 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum DrawDown of -9.7 days of Leveraged Gold-Currency Strategy is larger, thus better.
  • During the last 3 years, the maximum reduction from previous high is -9.7 days, which is larger, thus better than the value of -18.8 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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:
  • Looking at the maximum days under water of 181 days in the last 5 years of Leveraged Gold-Currency Strategy, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to the benchmark GLD (352 days)
  • Compared with GLD (334 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark of 162 days is lower, thus better.

AveDuration:

'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:
  • The average time in days below previous high water mark over 5 years of Leveraged Gold-Currency Strategy is 53 days, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark GLD (111 days) in the same period.
  • During the last 3 years, the average days under water is 51 days, which is lower, thus better than the value of 95 days from the benchmark.

Performance (YTD)

Historical returns have been extended using synthetic data.

Allocations
()

Allocations

Returns (%)

  • Note that yearly returns do not equal the sum of monthly returns due to compounding.
  • Performance results of Leveraged Gold-Currency 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.