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 28.3%, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (93.5%) in the same period.
• Looking at total return in of 21.9% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (81.7%).

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 5.1%, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (14.2%) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (22.2%) in the period of the last 3 years, the annual return (CAGR) of 6.9% is lower, thus worse.

Volatility:

'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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (17.1%) in the period of the last 5 years, the volatility of 3.2% of Minimum Volatility Portfolio is lower, thus better.
• Compared with SPY (15.4%) in the period of the last 3 years, the historical 30 days volatility of 3.1% is lower, thus better.

DownVol:

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

• Looking at the downside deviation 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%)
• Looking at downside volatility in of 2% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to SPY (10.3%).

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.68) in the period of the last 5 years, the Sharpe Ratio of 0.83 of Minimum Volatility Portfolio is higher, thus better.
• Looking at Sharpe Ratio in of 1.41 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to SPY (1.27).

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.'

• The downside risk / excess return profile over 5 years of Minimum Volatility Portfolio is 1.24, which is larger, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (0.99) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (1.92) in the period of the last 3 years, the excess return divided by the downside deviation of 2.16 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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (8.42 ) in the period of the last 5 years, the Ulcer Index of 0.99 of Minimum Volatility Portfolio is lower, thus better.
• Compared with SPY (3.52 ) in the period of the last 3 years, the Ulcer Index of 0.72 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.'

• The maximum drop from peak to valley over 5 years of Minimum Volatility Portfolio is -2.7 days, which is greater, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (-24.5 days) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (-18.8 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum DrawDown of -2.4 days is higher, 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'

• Looking at the maximum days below previous high of 291 days in the last 5 years of Minimum Volatility Portfolio, we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (488 days)
• 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 smaller, thus better.

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.'

• The average days under water over 5 years of Minimum Volatility Portfolio is 57 days, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (119 days) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (21 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the average time in days below previous high water mark of 25 days is greater, thus worse.