Max Sharpe 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.'

• Looking at the total return, or performance of 99.2% in the last 5 years of Max Sharpe Portfolio, we see it is relatively greater, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (85.9%)
• During the last 3 years, the total return, or increase in value is 65.5%, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of 73.7% from the benchmark.

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (13.3%) in the period of the last 5 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 14.8% of Max Sharpe Portfolio is larger, thus better.
• During the last 3 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) is 18.4%, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 20.3% from the benchmark.

Volatility:

'In finance, volatility (symbol σ) is the degree of variation of a trading price series over time as measured by the standard deviation of logarithmic returns. Historic volatility measures a time series of past market prices. Implied volatility looks forward in time, being derived from the market price of a market-traded derivative (in particular, an option). Commonly, the higher the volatility, the riskier the security.'

• Looking at the volatility of 11.1% in the last 5 years of Max Sharpe Portfolio, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (17.1%)
• Looking at 30 days standard deviation in of 11.3% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to SPY (15.2%).

DownVol:

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

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (11.8%) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside deviation of 8% of Max Sharpe Portfolio is smaller, thus better.
• During the last 3 years, the downside deviation is 8.1%, which is smaller, thus better than the value of 10.2% from the benchmark.

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.63) in the period of the last 5 years, the risk / return profile (Sharpe) of 1.11 of Max Sharpe Portfolio is higher, thus better.
• Looking at risk / return profile (Sharpe) in of 1.41 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to SPY (1.17).

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.'

• The excess return divided by the downside deviation over 5 years of Max Sharpe Portfolio is 1.54, which is greater, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (0.91) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (1.75) in the period of the last 3 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of 1.96 is higher, 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.'

• The Downside risk index over 5 years of Max Sharpe Portfolio is 2.82 , which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (8.42 ) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (3.48 ) in the period of the last 3 years, the Ulcer Ratio of 2.24 is lower, thus better.

MaxDD:

'A maximum drawdown is the maximum loss from a peak to a trough of a portfolio, before a new peak is attained. Maximum Drawdown is an indicator of downside risk over a specified time period. It can be used both as a stand-alone measure or as an input into other metrics such as 'Return over Maximum Drawdown' and the Calmar Ratio. Maximum Drawdown is expressed in percentage terms.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (-24.5 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum drop from peak to valley of -10.7 days of Max Sharpe Portfolio is greater, thus better.
• Looking at maximum reduction from previous high in of -8.3 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus better in comparison to SPY (-18.8 days).

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.'

• Looking at the maximum time in days below previous high water mark of 159 days in the last 5 years of Max Sharpe Portfolio, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (488 days)
• Compared with SPY (87 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark of 95 days is greater, thus worse.

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (119 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the average days below previous high of 30 days of Max Sharpe Portfolio is lower, thus better.
• During the last 3 years, the average days under water is 24 days, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 19 days from the benchmark.