Description

The 2x Universal Investment Strategy (UISx2) is a leveraged version of our core Universal Investment Strategy (UIS), an evolved, intelligent version of the classic 60/40 equity/bond portfolio that can adapt to current conditions, shifting portfolio weight away from stocks in difficult markets and adding weight to equity in bull runs.

The 2x leveraged version of the strategy employs leveraged versions of a S&P 500 ETF, a Treasury 20+ year ETF and a gold ETF.

The UISx2 is appropriate for investors who are comfortable taking on higher risks in exchange for the potential for of higher returns. Because leveraged ETFs are used, we recommend allocating no more than 25% of your total portfolio to this strategy.

Statistics (YTD)

What do these metrics mean? [Read More] [Hide]

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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:
  • Compared with the benchmark SPY (121.2%) in the period of the last 5 years, the total return, or increase in value of 105% of Universal Investment Strategy 2x Leverage is lower, thus worse.
  • Looking at total return in of 45.1% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (67.5%).

CAGR:

'Compound annual growth rate (CAGR) is a business and investing specific term for the geometric progression ratio that provides a constant rate of return over the time period. CAGR is not an accounting term, but it is often used to describe some element of the business, for example revenue, units delivered, registered users, etc. CAGR dampens the effect of volatility of periodic returns that can render arithmetic means irrelevant. It is particularly useful to compare growth rates from various data sets of common domain such as revenue growth of companies in the same industry.'

Which means for our asset as example:
  • Looking at the annual performance (CAGR) of 15.5% in the last 5 years of Universal Investment Strategy 2x Leverage, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (17.2%)
  • Compared with SPY (18.7%) in the period of the last 3 years, the annual performance (CAGR) of 13.2% is lower, thus worse.

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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:
  • The historical 30 days volatility over 5 years of Universal Investment Strategy 2x Leverage is 16.9%, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (18.7%) in the same period.
  • Looking at volatility in of 19.3% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to SPY (22.5%).

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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:
  • Looking at the downside deviation of 12.3% in the last 5 years of Universal Investment Strategy 2x Leverage, we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (13.6%)
  • During the last 3 years, the downside volatility is 14.2%, which is smaller, thus better than the value of 16.3% 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.'

Which means for our asset as example:
  • Looking at the Sharpe Ratio of 0.77 in the last 5 years of Universal Investment Strategy 2x Leverage, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.79)
  • Looking at Sharpe Ratio in of 0.55 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (0.72).

Sortino:

'The Sortino ratio measures the risk-adjusted return of an investment asset, portfolio, or strategy. It is a modification of the Sharpe ratio but penalizes only those returns falling below a user-specified target or required rate of return, while the Sharpe ratio penalizes both upside and downside volatility equally. Though both ratios measure an investment's risk-adjusted return, they do so in significantly different ways that will frequently lead to differing conclusions as to the true nature of the investment's return-generating efficiency. The Sortino ratio is used as a way to compare the risk-adjusted performance of programs with differing risk and return profiles. In general, risk-adjusted returns seek to normalize the risk across programs and then see which has the higher return unit per risk.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:
  • The downside risk / excess return profile over 5 years of Universal Investment Strategy 2x Leverage is 1.05, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (1.08) in the same period.
  • Compared with SPY (1) in the period of the last 3 years, the excess return divided by the downside deviation of 0.75 is lower, thus worse.

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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:
  • Looking at the Downside risk index of 7.33 in the last 5 years of Universal Investment Strategy 2x Leverage, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (5.59 )
  • During the last 3 years, the Downside risk index is 8.01 , which is greater, thus worse than the value of 6.83 from the benchmark.

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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:
  • The maximum DrawDown over 5 years of Universal Investment Strategy 2x Leverage is -27.8 days, which is higher, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (-33.7 days) in the same period.
  • Looking at maximum DrawDown in of -27.8 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus better in comparison to SPY (-33.7 days).

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) in days.'

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 253 days of Universal Investment Strategy 2x Leverage is greater, thus worse.
  • Looking at maximum time in days below previous high water mark in of 177 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (139 days).

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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:
  • Looking at the average time in days below previous high water mark of 59 days in the last 5 years of Universal Investment Strategy 2x Leverage, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (33 days)
  • Looking at average days below previous high in of 51 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (35 days).

Performance (YTD)

Historical returns have been extended using synthetic data.

Allocations
()

Allocations

Returns (%)

  • Note that yearly returns do not equal the sum of monthly returns due to compounding.
  • Performance results of Universal Investment Strategy 2x Leverage 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.