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 over 5 years of Minimum Volatility Portfolio is 33.6%, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (105.2%) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the total return, or performance is 23.1%, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of 88.7% from the benchmark.

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (15.5%) in the period of the last 5 years, the annual return (CAGR) of 6% of Minimum Volatility Portfolio is lower, thus worse.
• Looking at annual performance (CAGR) in of 7.2% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (23.7%).

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.'

• Looking at the historical 30 days volatility of 3.2% in the last 5 years of Minimum Volatility Portfolio, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (17.2%)
• During the last 3 years, the 30 days standard deviation is 3%, which is lower, thus better than the value of 16.2% from the benchmark.

DownVol:

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

• The downside risk over 5 years of Minimum Volatility Portfolio is 2.1%, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (11.9%) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the downside deviation is 1.9%, which is lower, thus better than the value of 10.6% from the benchmark.

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.'

• The risk / return profile (Sharpe) over 5 years of Minimum Volatility Portfolio is 1.09, which is larger, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (0.75) in the same period.
• Looking at risk / return profile (Sharpe) in of 1.56 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus better in comparison to SPY (1.31).

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 excess return divided by the downside deviation of 1.66 in the last 5 years of Minimum Volatility Portfolio, we see it is relatively greater, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (1.1)
• Compared with SPY (2.01) in the period of the last 3 years, the downside risk / excess return profile of 2.42 is greater, thus better.

Ulcer:

'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.'

• Looking at the Downside risk index of 0.98 in the last 5 years of Minimum Volatility Portfolio, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (8.42 )
• Compared with SPY (3.62 ) in the period of the last 3 years, the Ulcer Index of 0.7 is lower, thus better.

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.'

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

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.'

• The maximum days below previous high over 5 years of Minimum Volatility Portfolio is 291 days, which is smaller, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (488 days) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the maximum days below previous high is 86 days, which is smaller, thus better than the value of 87 days from the benchmark.

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.'

• Looking at the average time in days below previous high water mark of 58 days in the last 5 years of Minimum Volatility Portfolio, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (120 days)
• Compared with SPY (21 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the average days under water of 25 days is larger, thus worse.