Dow 30 Strategy

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.'

• Looking at the total return, or increase in value of 66% in the last 5 years of Dow 30 Strategy, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark DIA (82.2%)
• During the last 3 years, the total return is 34.4%, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 58% from the benchmark.

CAGR:

'The compound annual growth rate (CAGR) is a useful measure of growth over multiple time periods. It can be thought of as the growth rate that gets you from the initial investment value to the ending investment value if you assume that the investment has been compounding over the time period.'

• Compared with the benchmark DIA (12.8%) in the period of the last 5 years, the annual return (CAGR) of 10.7% of Dow 30 Strategy is smaller, thus worse.
• Compared with DIA (16.6%) in the period of the last 3 years, the annual performance (CAGR) of 10.4% is smaller, thus worse.

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.'

• Looking at the historical 30 days volatility of 7.4% in the last 5 years of Dow 30 Strategy, we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to the benchmark DIA (14.9%)
• During the last 3 years, the 30 days standard deviation is 7.4%, which is lower, thus better than the value of 13.8% from the benchmark.

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark DIA (10.2%) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside deviation of 5.1% of Dow 30 Strategy is lower, thus better.
• Looking at downside volatility in of 5.2% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to DIA (9.1%).

Sharpe:

'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.'

• Looking at the risk / return profile (Sharpe) of 1.11 in the last 5 years of Dow 30 Strategy, we see it is relatively greater, thus better in comparison to the benchmark DIA (0.69)
• During the last 3 years, the risk / return profile (Sharpe) is 1.06, which is higher, thus better than the value of 1.02 from the benchmark.

Sortino:

'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.'

• Looking at the excess return divided by the downside deviation of 1.6 in the last 5 years of Dow 30 Strategy, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to the benchmark DIA (1.01)
• Compared with DIA (1.54) in the period of the last 3 years, the excess return divided by the downside deviation of 1.53 is lower, thus worse.

Ulcer:

'The Ulcer Index is a technical indicator that measures downside risk, in terms of both the depth and duration of price declines. The index increases in value as the price moves farther away from a recent high and falls as the price rises to new highs. The indicator is usually calculated over a 14-day period, with the Ulcer Index showing the percentage drawdown a trader can expect from the high over that period. The greater the value of the Ulcer Index, the longer it takes for a stock to get back to the former high.'

• Compared with the benchmark DIA (5.93 ) in the period of the last 5 years, the Downside risk index of 2.87 of Dow 30 Strategy is smaller, thus better.
• Looking at Ulcer Ratio in of 3.09 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to DIA (3.54 ).

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.'

• Looking at the maximum DrawDown of -7.7 days in the last 5 years of Dow 30 Strategy, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to the benchmark DIA (-20.8 days)
• Looking at maximum DrawDown in of -7.5 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus better in comparison to DIA (-16 days).

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'

• Looking at the maximum time in days below previous high water mark of 424 days in the last 5 years of Dow 30 Strategy, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to the benchmark DIA (477 days)
• Looking at maximum days below previous high in of 267 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to DIA (142 days).

AveDuration:

'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.'

• The average days under water over 5 years of Dow 30 Strategy is 94 days, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark DIA (116 days) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the average days under water is 68 days, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 39 days from the benchmark.