US Market Strategy

TotalReturn:

'Total return is the amount of value an investor earns from a security over a specific period, typically one year, when all distributions are reinvested. Total return is expressed as a percentage of the amount invested. For example, a total return of 20% means the security increased by 20% of its original value due to a price increase, distribution of dividends (if a stock), coupons (if a bond) or capital gains (if a fund). Total return is a strong measure of an investment’s overall performance.'

• The total return, or increase in value over 5 years of US Market Strategy is 78.9%, which is greater, thus better compared to the benchmark DIA (78.7%) in the same period.
• Compared with DIA (57%) in the period of the last 3 years, the total return, or performance of 27.3% is lower, thus worse.

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark DIA (12.3%) in the period of the last 5 years, the annual return (CAGR) of 12.3% of US Market Strategy is greater, thus better.
• Compared with DIA (16.3%) in the period of the last 3 years, the annual performance (CAGR) of 8.4% is lower, 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 6.8% in the last 5 years of US Market Strategy, we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to the benchmark DIA (13.4%)
• During the last 3 years, the volatility is 6.2%, which is lower, thus better than the value of 12.7% from the benchmark.

DownVol:

'Downside risk is the financial risk associated with losses. That is, it is the risk of the actual return being below the expected return, or the uncertainty about the magnitude of that difference. 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.'

• The downside deviation over 5 years of US Market Strategy is 7.5%, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark DIA (14.8%) in the same period.
• Compared with DIA (14.2%) in the period of the last 3 years, the downside deviation of 7.2% 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.'

• Compared with the benchmark DIA (0.73) in the period of the last 5 years, the Sharpe Ratio of 1.45 of US Market Strategy is greater, thus better.
• Looking at ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) in of 0.95 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to DIA (1.09).

Sortino:

'The Sortino ratio improves upon the Sharpe ratio by isolating downside volatility from total volatility by dividing excess return by the downside deviation. The Sortino ratio is a variation of the Sharpe ratio that differentiates harmful volatility from total overall volatility by using the asset's standard deviation of negative asset returns, called downside deviation. The Sortino ratio takes the asset's return and subtracts the risk-free rate, and then divides that amount by the asset's downside deviation. The ratio was named after Frank A. Sortino.'

• Looking at the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of 1.3 in the last 5 years of US Market Strategy, we see it is relatively greater, thus better in comparison to the benchmark DIA (0.66)
• Compared with DIA (0.97) in the period of the last 3 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of 0.82 is lower, thus worse.

Ulcer:

'Ulcer Index is a method for measuring investment risk that addresses the real concerns of investors, unlike the widely used standard deviation of return. UI is a measure of the depth and duration of drawdowns in prices from earlier highs. Using Ulcer Index instead of standard deviation can lead to very different conclusions about investment risk and risk-adjusted return, especially when evaluating strategies that seek to avoid major declines in portfolio value (market timing, dynamic asset allocation, hedge funds, etc.). The Ulcer Index was originally developed in 1987. Since then, it has been widely recognized and adopted by the investment community. According to Nelson Freeburg, editor of Formula Research, Ulcer Index is “perhaps the most fully realized statistical portrait of risk there is.'

• Looking at the Ulcer Index of 1.59 in the last 5 years of US Market Strategy, we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to the benchmark DIA (4.24 )
• Looking at Downside risk index in of 1.61 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to DIA (4.17 ).

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 DrawDown over 5 years of US Market Strategy is -5.3 days, which is greater, thus better compared to the benchmark DIA (-18.1 days) in the same period.
• Looking at maximum DrawDown in of -5.3 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus better in comparison to DIA (-18.1 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). 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'

• Compared with the benchmark DIA (227 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum days under water of 132 days of US Market Strategy is lower, thus better.
• Compared with DIA (161 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum days below previous high of 93 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.'

• Compared with the benchmark DIA (53 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the average time in days below previous high water mark of 26 days of US Market Strategy is lower, thus better.
• Looking at average days under water in of 23 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to DIA (43 days).