The Gold-Currency Strategy II 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 strategy is an update to the original GLD-USD strategy that uses inverse leveraged ETFs which are not permitted in some retirement accounts.

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Compared with the benchmark GLD (33.7%) in the period of the last 5 years, the total return, or performance of 24.7% of Gold-Currency Strategy II is lower, thus worse.
- Compared with GLD (30.9%) in the period of the last 3 years, the total return, or increase in value of 21.7% is lower, thus worse.

'Compound annual growth rate (CAGR) is a business and investing specific term for the geometric progression ratio that provides a constant rate of return over the time period. CAGR is not an accounting term, but it is often used to describe some element of the business, for example revenue, units delivered, registered users, etc. CAGR dampens the effect of volatility of periodic returns that can render arithmetic means irrelevant. It is particularly useful to compare growth rates from various data sets of common domain such as revenue growth of companies in the same industry.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Looking at the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 4.5% in the last 5 years of Gold-Currency Strategy II, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark GLD (6%)
- Compared with GLD (9.4%) in the period of the last 3 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 6.8% is smaller, thus worse.

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- Compared with the benchmark GLD (13.3%) in the period of the last 5 years, the historical 30 days volatility of 9.6% of Gold-Currency Strategy II is lower, thus better.
- Compared with GLD (12.4%) in the period of the last 3 years, the historical 30 days volatility of 9.7% is lower, thus better.

'The downside volatility is similar to the volatility, or standard deviation, but only takes losing/negative periods into account.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- The downside volatility over 5 years of Gold-Currency Strategy II is 6.4%, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark GLD (9%) in the same period.
- During the last 3 years, the downside risk is 6.6%, which is smaller, thus better than the value of 8.4% from the benchmark.

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- The risk / return profile (Sharpe) over 5 years of Gold-Currency Strategy II is 0.21, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark GLD (0.26) in the same period.
- Compared with GLD (0.56) in the period of the last 3 years, the ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) of 0.44 is lower, thus worse.

'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:- Compared with the benchmark GLD (0.39) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside risk / excess return profile of 0.31 of Gold-Currency Strategy II is lower, thus worse.
- Looking at ratio of annual return and downside deviation in of 0.65 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to GLD (0.82).

'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 4.5 in the last 5 years of Gold-Currency Strategy II, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to the benchmark GLD (7.46 )
- Looking at Downside risk index in of 3.08 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to GLD (5.64 ).

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Looking at the maximum drop from peak to valley of -12.5 days in the last 5 years of Gold-Currency Strategy II, we see it is relatively larger, thus better in comparison to the benchmark GLD (-17.8 days)
- Looking at maximum DrawDown in of -12.5 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to GLD (-13.8 days).

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- The maximum days below previous high over 5 years of Gold-Currency Strategy II is 606 days, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark GLD (741 days) in the same period.
- Compared with GLD (352 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum days under water of 299 days is lower, thus better.

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- The average time in days below previous high water mark over 5 years of Gold-Currency Strategy II is 186 days, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark GLD (245 days) in the same period.
- Compared with GLD (103 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the average days under water of 87 days is lower, thus better.

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

Allocations and holdings shown below are delayed by one month. To see current trading allocations of Gold-Currency Strategy II, register now.

()

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