Gold-USD Aggressive Sub-strategy

TotalReturn:

'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.'

• The total return, or performance over 5 years of Gold-USD Aggressive Sub-strategy is 77.9%, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark GLD (78.8%) in the same period.
• Compared with GLD (87.4%) in the period of the last 3 years, the total return of 31% is smaller, 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.'

• Looking at the annual performance (CAGR) of 12.3% 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 (12.4%)
• During the last 3 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) is 9.5%, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 23.5% from the benchmark.

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.'

• The 30 days standard deviation over 5 years of Gold-USD Aggressive Sub-strategy is 17.8%, which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark GLD (15.4%) in the same period.
• Compared with GLD (15.5%) in the period of the last 3 years, the volatility of 18.7% is higher, thus worse.

DownVol:

'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 GLD (10.7%) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside risk of 12.9% of Gold-USD Aggressive Sub-strategy is higher, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the downside volatility is 13.8%, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 10% 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.'

• Looking at the Sharpe Ratio of 0.55 in the last 5 years of Gold-USD Aggressive Sub-strategy, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark GLD (0.64)
• Looking at ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) in of 0.37 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to GLD (1.36).

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark GLD (0.92) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside risk / excess return profile of 0.76 of Gold-USD Aggressive Sub-strategy is smaller, thus worse.
• Compared with GLD (2.09) in the period of the last 3 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of 0.51 is smaller, thus worse.

Ulcer:

'Ulcer Index is a method for measuring investment risk that addresses the real concerns of investors, unlike the widely used standard deviation of return. UI is a measure of the depth and duration of drawdowns in prices from earlier highs. Using Ulcer Index instead of standard deviation can lead to very different conclusions about investment risk and risk-adjusted return, especially when evaluating strategies that seek to avoid major declines in portfolio value (market timing, dynamic asset allocation, hedge funds, etc.). The Ulcer Index was originally developed in 1987. Since then, it has been widely recognized and adopted by the investment community. According to Nelson Freeburg, editor of Formula Research, Ulcer Index is “perhaps the most fully realized statistical portrait of risk there is.'

• The Downside risk index over 5 years of Gold-USD Aggressive Sub-strategy is 15 , which is larger, thus worse compared to the benchmark GLD (9.78 ) in the same period.
• Looking at Ulcer Index in of 19 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to GLD (4 ).

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.'

• The maximum drop from peak to valley over 5 years of Gold-USD Aggressive Sub-strategy is -34.4 days, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark GLD (-22 days) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the maximum drop from peak to valley is -34.4 days, which is lower, thus worse than the value of -11.3 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'

• The maximum days below previous high over 5 years of Gold-USD Aggressive Sub-strategy is 608 days, which is smaller, thus better compared to the benchmark GLD (897 days) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the maximum days under water is 608 days, which is higher, thus worse than the value of 145 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 223 days 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 (346 days)
• Looking at average days under water in of 259 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to GLD (31 days).