Description

This is the aggressive sub-strategy of the leveraged GLD-USD strategy.

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:
  • Looking at the total return, or performance of 41.3% in the last 5 years of Gold-USD Aggressive Sub-strategy, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark GLD (43%)
  • Compared with GLD (27.9%) in the period of the last 3 years, the total return, or performance of 40.3% is higher, thus better.

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.'

Which means for our asset as example:
  • Compared with the benchmark GLD (7.4%) in the period of the last 5 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 7.2% of Gold-USD Aggressive Sub-strategy is lower, thus worse.
  • Compared with GLD (8.6%) in the period of the last 3 years, the annual performance (CAGR) of 12% is larger, thus better.

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.'

Which means for our asset as example:
  • Compared with the benchmark GLD (13.8%) in the period of the last 5 years, the 30 days standard deviation of 13.5% of Gold-USD Aggressive Sub-strategy is smaller, thus better.
  • Compared with GLD (16%) in the period of the last 3 years, the 30 days standard deviation of 14.9% is lower, thus better.

DownVol:

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

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:
  • Looking at the downside deviation of 9.4% in the last 5 years of Gold-USD Aggressive Sub-strategy, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to the benchmark GLD (9.9%)
  • Compared with GLD (11.6%) in the period of the last 3 years, the downside deviation of 10.2% is smaller, thus better.

Sharpe:

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:
  • Compared with the benchmark GLD (0.36) in the period of the last 5 years, the ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) of 0.35 of Gold-USD Aggressive Sub-strategy is lower, thus worse.
  • During the last 3 years, the Sharpe Ratio is 0.64, which is larger, thus better than the value of 0.38 from the benchmark.

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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:
  • The excess return divided by the downside deviation over 5 years of Gold-USD Aggressive Sub-strategy is 0.5, which is larger, thus better compared to the benchmark GLD (0.5) in the same period.
  • During the last 3 years, the downside risk / excess return profile is 0.92, which is higher, thus better than the value of 0.52 from the benchmark.

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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:
  • Compared with the benchmark GLD (8.36 ) in the period of the last 5 years, the Ulcer Ratio of 8.21 of Gold-USD Aggressive Sub-strategy is lower, thus better.
  • Compared with GLD (9.46 ) in the period of the last 3 years, the Downside risk index of 5.81 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.'

Which means for our asset as example:
  • The maximum reduction from previous high over 5 years of Gold-USD Aggressive Sub-strategy is -18.9 days, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark GLD (-18.8 days) in the same period.
  • During the last 3 years, the maximum reduction from previous high is -15.6 days, which is larger, thus better than the value of -18.8 days from the benchmark.

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.'

Which means for our asset as example:
  • Compared with the benchmark GLD (475 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark of 551 days of Gold-USD Aggressive Sub-strategy is larger, thus worse.
  • During the last 3 years, the maximum days under water is 245 days, which is lower, thus better than the value of 475 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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:
  • Compared with the benchmark GLD (156 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the average time in days below previous high water mark of 161 days of Gold-USD Aggressive Sub-strategy is higher, thus worse.
  • Looking at average time in days below previous high water mark in of 70 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to GLD (169 days).

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-USD Aggressive Sub-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.