US sectors worst US sectors

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 over 5 years of US sectors worst US sectors is 39.7%, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (83.4%) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the total return, or performance is 25.1%, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 79.8% 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.'

• The compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) over 5 years of US sectors worst US sectors is 6.9%, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (12.9%) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the annual return (CAGR) is 7.8%, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of 21.7% from the benchmark.

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.'

• The 30 days standard deviation over 5 years of US sectors worst US sectors is 15.1%, which is smaller, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (17.1%) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (15.2%) in the period of the last 3 years, the volatility of 13.4% 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 volatility of 10.6% 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 (11.8%)
• Compared with SPY (10.1%) in the period of the last 3 years, the downside volatility of 9.4% is smaller, 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.'

• The risk / return profile (Sharpe) over 5 years of US sectors worst US sectors is 0.29, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.61) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (1.26) in the period of the last 3 years, the risk / return profile (Sharpe) of 0.4 is smaller, thus worse.

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 US sectors worst US sectors is 0.42, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.89) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the excess return divided by the downside deviation is 0.56, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of 1.89 from the benchmark.

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 Downside risk index of 8.1 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 (8.45 )
• Looking at Ulcer Ratio in of 6.43 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (3.5 ).

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 (-24.5 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum DrawDown of -20.6 days of US sectors worst US sectors is higher, thus better.
• Looking at maximum drop from peak to valley in of -14.1 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus better in comparison to SPY (-18.8 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'

• Looking at the maximum time in days below previous high water mark of 492 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 (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 363 days is larger, thus worse.

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 SPY (119 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the average time in days below previous high water mark of 163 days of US sectors worst US sectors is larger, thus worse.
• Looking at average days under water in of 108 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (20 days).