US Market Strategy

TotalReturn:

'Total return, when measuring performance, is the actual rate of return of an investment or a pool of investments over a given evaluation period. Total return includes interest, capital gains, dividends and distributions realized over a given period of time. Total return accounts for two categories of return: income including interest paid by fixed-income investments, distributions or dividends and capital appreciation, representing the change in the market price of an asset.'

• Looking at the total return, or performance of 85.2% in the last 5 years of US Market Strategy, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to the benchmark DIA (74.6%)
• Compared with DIA (57.5%) in the period of the last 3 years, the total return, or performance of 31.9% 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.'

• Compared with the benchmark DIA (11.8%) in the period of the last 5 years, the annual return (CAGR) of 13.1% of US Market Strategy is greater, thus better.
• During the last 3 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) is 9.7%, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of 16.4% 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 30 days standard deviation over 5 years of US Market Strategy is 6.9%, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark DIA (13.4%) in the same period.
• Compared with DIA (12.9%) in the period of the last 3 years, the 30 days standard deviation of 6.3% is lower, thus better.

DownVol:

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

• The downside volatility over 5 years of US Market Strategy is 7.5%, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark DIA (14.8%) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the downside risk is 7.2%, which is smaller, thus better than the value of 14.6% 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 DIA (0.69) in the period of the last 5 years, the ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) of 1.55 of US Market Strategy is higher, thus better.
• Looking at Sharpe Ratio in of 1.15 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to DIA (1.08).

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.'

• The excess return divided by the downside deviation over 5 years of US Market Strategy is 1.41, which is larger, thus better compared to the benchmark DIA (0.63) in the same period.
• Looking at ratio of annual return and downside deviation in of 1 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus better in comparison to DIA (0.95).

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.'

• The Downside risk index over 5 years of US Market Strategy is 1.51 , which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark DIA (4.25 ) in the same period.
• Compared with DIA (4.18 ) in the period of the last 3 years, the Ulcer Ratio of 1.47 is lower, thus better.

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 DIA (-18.1 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum reduction from previous high of -5.3 days of US Market Strategy is higher, thus better.
• During the last 3 years, the maximum drop from peak to valley is -5.3 days, which is larger, thus better than the value of -18.1 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'

• Compared with the benchmark DIA (227 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum days below previous high of 132 days of US Market Strategy is lower, thus better.
• During the last 3 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark is 93 days, which is smaller, thus better than the value of 161 days from the benchmark.

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.'

• Looking at the average time in days below previous high water mark of 25 days in the last 5 years of US Market Strategy, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to the benchmark DIA (53 days)
• Compared with DIA (44 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the average days under water of 22 days is lower, thus better.