Description

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.

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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:
  • The total return over 5 years of Gold-Currency Strategy II is 110.8%, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark GLD (122.4%) in the same period.
  • Compared with GLD (107.6%) in the period of the last 3 years, the total return of 121.2% is greater, thus better.

CAGR:

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:
  • Looking at the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 16.2% in the last 5 years of Gold-Currency Strategy II, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark GLD (17.4%)
  • During the last 3 years, the annual return (CAGR) is 30.5%, which is larger, thus better than the value of 27.8% from the benchmark.

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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:
  • Looking at the volatility of 15.2% in the last 5 years of Gold-Currency Strategy II, we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to the benchmark GLD (18.5%)
  • Looking at historical 30 days volatility in of 18.6% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to GLD (20.7%).

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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:
  • Looking at the downside risk of 10.8% in the last 5 years of Gold-Currency Strategy II, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to the benchmark GLD (13.1%)
  • Looking at downside deviation in of 13.2% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to GLD (14.8%).

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:
  • Compared with the benchmark GLD (0.81) in the period of the last 5 years, the risk / return profile (Sharpe) of 0.9 of Gold-Currency Strategy II is higher, thus better.
  • Looking at ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) in of 1.51 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to GLD (1.22).

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:
  • Compared with the benchmark GLD (1.14) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside risk / excess return profile of 1.26 of Gold-Currency Strategy II is higher, thus better.
  • Compared with GLD (1.71) in the period of the last 3 years, the downside risk / excess return profile of 2.12 is larger, thus better.

Ulcer:

'Ulcer Index is a method for measuring investment risk that addresses the real concerns of investors, unlike the widely used standard deviation of return. UI is a measure of the depth and duration of drawdowns in prices from earlier highs. Using Ulcer Index instead of standard deviation can lead to very different conclusions about investment risk and risk-adjusted return, especially when evaluating strategies that seek to avoid major declines in portfolio value (market timing, dynamic asset allocation, hedge funds, etc.). The Ulcer Index was originally developed in 1987. Since then, it has been widely recognized and adopted by the investment community. According to Nelson Freeburg, editor of Formula Research, Ulcer Index is “perhaps the most fully realized statistical portrait of risk there is.'

Which means for our asset as example:
  • Looking at the Ulcer Ratio of 7.54 in the last 5 years of Gold-Currency Strategy II, we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to the benchmark GLD (8.43 )
  • Compared with GLD (7.23 ) in the period of the last 3 years, the Ulcer Ratio of 5.63 is smaller, 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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:
  • Compared with the benchmark GLD (-26.4 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum drop from peak to valley of -19.2 days of Gold-Currency Strategy II is larger, thus better.
  • During the last 3 years, the maximum reduction from previous high is -19.2 days, which is larger, thus better than the value of -26.4 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). 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'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:
  • Looking at the maximum time in days below previous high water mark of 590 days in the last 5 years of Gold-Currency Strategy II, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark GLD (436 days)
  • Looking at maximum days below previous high in of 122 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to GLD (122 days).

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.'

Which means for our asset as example:
  • Looking at the average time in days below previous high water mark of 166 days in the last 5 years of Gold-Currency Strategy II, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark GLD (101 days)
  • Compared with GLD (26 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the average days below previous high of 25 days is lower, thus better.

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 Gold-Currency Strategy II are hypothetical and do not account for slippage, fees or taxes.
  • Results may be based on backtesting, which has many inherent limitations, some of which are described in our Terms of Use.