The U.S. Market Strategy was designed as an alternative to our Universal Investment Strategy which allocates between SPY (S&P 500 ETF) and TLT (U.S. Treasuries ETF). The equity component of this new strategy switches between SPY (S&P500), QQQ (Nasdaq 100), DIA (Dow 30) and SPLV (S&P 500 low volatility) so it can take advantage of different market conditions. The addition of SPLV provides a good defensive option in times of high market volatility.

In addition to U.S. equities, the strategy utilizes a hedge strategy that switches between TLT, TIP, UUP and GLD.

The strategy's backtests performed substantially better than a simple SPY-TLT investment. All of the component ETFs are very liquid with small spreads making them easy to trade with negligible costs.

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- The total return, or performance over 5 years of US Market Strategy is 96.3%, which is greater, thus better compared to the benchmark DIA (64.6%) in the same period.
- Compared with DIA (32.1%) in the period of the last 3 years, the total return of 59.8% is greater, thus better.

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Compared with the benchmark DIA (10.5%) in the period of the last 5 years, the annual performance (CAGR) of 14.5% of US Market Strategy is larger, thus better.
- During the last 3 years, the annual performance (CAGR) is 16.9%, which is higher, thus better than the value of 9.7% from the benchmark.

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Looking at the volatility of 8.7% in the last 5 years of US Market Strategy, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to the benchmark DIA (21%)
- Compared with DIA (24.3%) in the period of the last 3 years, the historical 30 days volatility of 9.8% is lower, thus better.

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

Which means for our asset as example:- The downside deviation over 5 years of US Market Strategy is 6.2%, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark DIA (15.3%) in the same period.
- Looking at downside deviation in of 7% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to DIA (17.7%).

'The Sharpe ratio (also known as the Sharpe index, the Sharpe measure, and the reward-to-variability ratio) is a way to examine the performance of an investment by adjusting for its risk. The ratio measures the excess return (or risk premium) per unit of deviation in an investment asset or a trading strategy, typically referred to as risk, named after William F. Sharpe.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Looking at the risk / return profile (Sharpe) of 1.37 in the last 5 years of US Market Strategy, we see it is relatively larger, thus better in comparison to the benchmark DIA (0.38)
- Looking at risk / return profile (Sharpe) in of 1.47 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to DIA (0.3).

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Compared with the benchmark DIA (0.52) in the period of the last 5 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of 1.93 of US Market Strategy is larger, thus better.
- During the last 3 years, the downside risk / excess return profile is 2.07, which is larger, thus better than the value of 0.41 from the benchmark.

'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:- Looking at the Ulcer Index of 2.32 in the last 5 years of US Market Strategy, we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to the benchmark DIA (7.15 )
- Looking at Downside risk index in of 2.57 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to DIA (8.22 ).

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- The maximum DrawDown over 5 years of US Market Strategy is -13.1 days, which is higher, thus better compared to the benchmark DIA (-36.7 days) in the same period.
- Looking at maximum reduction from previous high in of -13.1 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus better in comparison to DIA (-36.7 days).

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- The maximum days under water over 5 years of US Market Strategy is 95 days, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark DIA (187 days) in the same period.
- Compared with DIA (187 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum days below previous high of 95 days is smaller, thus better.

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- The average days below previous high over 5 years of US Market Strategy is 26 days, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark DIA (52 days) in the same period.
- During the last 3 years, the average time in days below previous high water mark is 24 days, which is lower, thus better than the value of 49 days from the benchmark.

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

Allocations and holdings shown below are delayed by one month.

Register now to get the current trading allocations.

- Note that yearly returns do not equal the sum of monthly returns due to compounding.
- Performance results of US Market 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.