US sectors worst US sectors

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, or performance over 5 years of US sectors worst US sectors is 103.6%, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (106.8%) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the total return is 45.1%, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 71.9% 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 (15.7%) in the period of the last 5 years, the annual return (CAGR) of 15.3% of US sectors worst US sectors is smaller, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) is 13.2%, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 19.8% from the benchmark.

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.'

• The volatility over 5 years of US sectors worst US sectors is 18.1%, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (18.9%) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (21.9%) in the period of the last 3 years, the 30 days standard deviation of 20.8% is smaller, thus better.

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.'

• Looking at the downside volatility of 12.4% in the last 5 years of US sectors worst US sectors, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (13.8%)
• During the last 3 years, the downside risk is 14.4%, which is smaller, thus better than the value of 15.9% from the benchmark.

Sharpe:

'The Sharpe ratio (also known as the Sharpe index, the Sharpe measure, and the reward-to-variability ratio) is a way to examine the performance of an investment by adjusting for its risk. The ratio measures the excess return (or risk premium) per unit of deviation in an investment asset or a trading strategy, typically referred to as risk, named after William F. Sharpe.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.69) in the period of the last 5 years, the ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) of 0.71 of US sectors worst US sectors is greater, thus better.
• Compared with SPY (0.79) in the period of the last 3 years, the ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) of 0.52 is lower, thus worse.

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 excess return divided by the downside deviation of 1.03 in the last 5 years of US sectors worst US sectors, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.95)
• Looking at downside risk / excess return profile in of 0.74 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (1.09).

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (5.61 ) in the period of the last 5 years, the Ulcer Index of 7.49 of US sectors worst US sectors is higher, thus worse.
• Looking at Downside risk index in of 9.23 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (6.08 ).

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 (-33.7 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum drop from peak to valley of -38.4 days of US sectors worst US sectors is smaller, thus worse.
• Looking at maximum drop from peak to valley in of -38.4 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse 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.'

• The maximum days under water over 5 years of US sectors worst US sectors is 316 days, which is greater, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (139 days) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the maximum days below previous high is 316 days, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 119 days from the benchmark.

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.'

• Looking at the average days under water of 62 days in the last 5 years of US sectors worst US sectors, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (32 days)
• Looking at average days below previous high in of 82 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (22 days).