This strategy selects the top three performers from our core strategies, based on the most recent 6 month performance, and allocates one third to each of them.

Note that very often the strategy will invest in the more aggressive of our strategies, which might not be suitable for all investors. You can create your version of this strategy with our Portfolio Builder. Simply select the top 2, 3, or 4 strategies and assign equal weights to each or adjust your allocations for your risk level. You will need to manually review and update the top performers periodically.

All of our current strategies are included in the algorithm.

'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 SPY (124.9%) in the period of the last 5 years, the total return, or performance of 86.8% of Top 3 Strategies is lower, thus worse.
- During the last 3 years, the total return is 41.9%, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 60.5% from the benchmark.

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Looking at the annual performance (CAGR) of 13.3% in the last 5 years of Top 3 Strategies, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (17.6%)
- Looking at compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) in of 12.4% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (17.1%).

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- Looking at the historical 30 days volatility of 8.8% in the last 5 years of Top 3 Strategies, we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (18.7%)
- During the last 3 years, the historical 30 days volatility is 10.3%, which is smaller, thus better than the value of 22.6% from the benchmark.

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Looking at the downside volatility of 6.3% in the last 5 years of Top 3 Strategies, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (13.5%)
- During the last 3 years, the downside risk is 7.4%, which is lower, thus better than the value of 16.4% 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:- Looking at the Sharpe Ratio of 1.23 in the last 5 years of Top 3 Strategies, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.81)
- During the last 3 years, the risk / return profile (Sharpe) is 0.96, which is larger, thus better than the value of 0.65 from the benchmark.

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- The downside risk / excess return profile over 5 years of Top 3 Strategies is 1.72, which is larger, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (1.12) in the same period.
- Compared with SPY (0.89) in the period of the last 3 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of 1.34 is larger, thus better.

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Looking at the Downside risk index of 1.79 in the last 5 years of Top 3 Strategies, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (5.58 )
- Compared with SPY (6.82 ) in the period of the last 3 years, the Ulcer Ratio of 2.14 is smaller, thus better.

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- The maximum reduction from previous high over 5 years of Top 3 Strategies is -14.3 days, which is greater, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (-33.7 days) in the same period.
- Looking at maximum reduction from previous high in of -14.3 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus better in comparison to SPY (-33.7 days).

'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'

Which means for our asset as example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (139 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum days under water of 93 days of Top 3 Strategies is lower, thus better.
- During the last 3 years, the maximum days below previous high is 83 days, which is lower, thus better than the value of 128 days from the benchmark.

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- The average time in days below previous high water mark over 5 years of Top 3 Strategies is 19 days, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (32 days) in the same period.
- Compared with SPY (33 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the average time in days below previous high water mark of 19 days is lower, thus better.

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 Top 3 Strategies, register now.

()

- Note that yearly returns do not equal the sum of monthly returns due to compounding.
- Performance results of Top 3 Strategies 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.