Minimum Volatility Portfolio

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 increase in value over 5 years of Minimum Volatility Portfolio is 29.3%, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (86.9%) in the same period.
• Looking at total return, or performance in of 23.7% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (79.5%).

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.'

• The compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) over 5 years of Minimum Volatility Portfolio is 5.3%, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (13.4%) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (21.6%) in the period of the last 3 years, the annual performance (CAGR) of 7.4% 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 30 days standard deviation of 3.1% in the last 5 years of Minimum Volatility Portfolio, we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (17.1%)
• Compared with SPY (15.2%) in the period of the last 3 years, the 30 days standard deviation of 3.2% is lower, thus better.

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.'

• Looking at the downside risk of 2.1% in the last 5 years of Minimum Volatility Portfolio, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (11.8%)
• Compared with SPY (10.2%) in the period of the last 3 years, the downside volatility of 2.2% is lower, thus better.

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.'

• The Sharpe Ratio over 5 years of Minimum Volatility Portfolio is 0.91, which is higher, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (0.64) in the same period.
• Looking at ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) in of 1.53 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus better in comparison to SPY (1.26).

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.'

• Looking at the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of 1.36 in the last 5 years of Minimum Volatility Portfolio, we see it is relatively larger, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.92)
• Compared with SPY (1.88) in the period of the last 3 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of 2.26 is larger, thus better.

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 SPY (8.44 ) in the period of the last 5 years, the Ulcer Index of 0.98 of Minimum Volatility Portfolio is lower, thus better.
• Looking at Downside risk index in of 0.67 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to SPY (3.5 ).

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 reduction from previous high of -2.7 days in the last 5 years of Minimum Volatility Portfolio, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (-24.5 days)
• Compared with SPY (-18.8 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum reduction from previous high of -2.4 days is larger, thus better.

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 time in days below previous high water mark over 5 years of Minimum Volatility Portfolio is 291 days, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (488 days) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (87 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark of 86 days is lower, thus better.

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 Minimum Volatility Portfolio is 58 days, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (120 days) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the average time in days below previous high water mark is 22 days, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 20 days from the benchmark.