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

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- Compared with the benchmark GLD (32.6%) in the period of the last 5 years, the total return, or increase in value of 30% of Gold-USD Aggressive Sub-strategy is lower, thus worse.
- Compared with GLD (46.2%) in the period of the last 3 years, the total return, or increase in value of 5.4% is smaller, thus worse.

'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 (5.8%) in the period of the last 5 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 5.4% of Gold-USD Aggressive Sub-strategy is lower, thus worse.
- During the last 3 years, the annual performance (CAGR) is 1.8%, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 13.5% from the benchmark.

'Volatility is a rate at which the price of a security increases or decreases for a given set of returns. Volatility is measured by calculating the standard deviation of the annualized returns over a given period of time. It shows the range to which the price of a security may increase or decrease. Volatility measures the risk of a security. It is used in option pricing formula to gauge the fluctuations in the returns of the underlying assets. Volatility indicates the pricing behavior of the security and helps estimate the fluctuations that may happen in a short period of time.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Looking at the historical 30 days volatility of 13.1% in the last 5 years of Gold-USD Aggressive Sub-strategy, we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to the benchmark GLD (13.4%)
- During the last 3 years, the volatility is 14.1%, which is lower, thus better than the value of 15% from the benchmark.

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- Looking at the downside risk of 9.2% 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 (9.6%)
- During the last 3 years, the downside volatility is 10.1%, which is lower, thus better than the value of 10.7% from the benchmark.

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Compared with the benchmark GLD (0.25) in the period of the last 5 years, the risk / return profile (Sharpe) of 0.22 of Gold-USD Aggressive Sub-strategy is lower, thus worse.
- Looking at ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) in of -0.05 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to GLD (0.73).

'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:- Looking at the excess return divided by the downside deviation of 0.31 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 (0.34)
- Compared with GLD (1.03) in the period of the last 3 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of -0.07 is smaller, thus worse.

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- Compared with the benchmark GLD (8.21 ) in the period of the last 5 years, the Downside risk index of 7.64 of Gold-USD Aggressive Sub-strategy is lower, thus better.
- Looking at Downside risk index in of 6.68 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to GLD (6.92 ).

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- Compared with the benchmark GLD (-18.8 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum drop from peak to valley of -18.9 days of Gold-USD Aggressive Sub-strategy is lower, thus worse.
- Compared with GLD (-18.8 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum drop from peak to valley of -15.7 days is larger, thus better.

'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) in days.'

Which means for our asset as example:- Looking at the maximum days under water of 551 days in the last 5 years of Gold-USD Aggressive Sub-strategy, we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to the benchmark GLD (724 days)
- Compared with GLD (245 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark of 366 days is larger, thus worse.

'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:- Compared with the benchmark GLD (249 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the average time in days below previous high water mark of 143 days of Gold-USD Aggressive Sub-strategy is lower, thus better.
- During the last 3 years, the average time in days below previous high water mark is 109 days, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 60 days from the benchmark.

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

Allocations and holdings shown below are delayed by one month. To see current trading allocations of Gold-USD Aggressive Sub-strategy, register now.

()

- 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.