Leveraged Gold-Currency Strategy

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 over 5 years of Leveraged Gold-Currency Strategy is 97.4%, which is greater, thus better compared to the benchmark GLD (83.1%) in the same period.
• Compared with GLD (32.5%) in the period of the last 3 years, the total return, or performance of 43.8% is larger, thus better.

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 GLD (12.9%) in the period of the last 5 years, the annual return (CAGR) of 14.6% of Leveraged Gold-Currency Strategy is greater, thus better.
• During the last 3 years, the annual performance (CAGR) is 12.9%, which is greater, thus better than the value of 9.8% from the benchmark.

Volatility:

'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.'

• Compared with the benchmark GLD (15%) in the period of the last 5 years, the 30 days standard deviation of 11% of Leveraged Gold-Currency Strategy is smaller, thus better.
• During the last 3 years, the volatility is 10.6%, which is lower, thus better than the value of 13.7% from the benchmark.

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 deviation of 7.5% in the last 5 years of Leveraged Gold-Currency Strategy, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to the benchmark GLD (10.5%)
• During the last 3 years, the downside deviation is 7.3%, which is smaller, thus better than the value of 9.3% 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.'

• Compared with the benchmark GLD (0.69) in the period of the last 5 years, the risk / return profile (Sharpe) of 1.1 of Leveraged Gold-Currency Strategy is greater, thus better.
• Compared with GLD (0.53) in the period of the last 3 years, the risk / return profile (Sharpe) of 0.98 is greater, thus better.

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark GLD (0.99) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside risk / excess return profile of 1.61 of Leveraged Gold-Currency Strategy is larger, thus better.
• During the last 3 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation is 1.42, which is higher, thus better than the value of 0.79 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.'

• The Ulcer Index over 5 years of Leveraged Gold-Currency Strategy is 5.9 , which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark GLD (9.77 ) in the same period.
• Looking at Downside risk index in of 6.39 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to GLD (8.62 ).

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 GLD (-22 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum reduction from previous high of -15.2 days of Leveraged Gold-Currency Strategy is larger, thus better.
• During the last 3 years, the maximum DrawDown is -15.2 days, which is higher, thus better than the value of -21 days from the benchmark.

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 Leveraged Gold-Currency Strategy is 374 days, which is smaller, thus better compared to the benchmark GLD (897 days) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the maximum days below previous high is 374 days, which is lower, thus better than the value of 436 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.'

• The average days under water over 5 years of Leveraged Gold-Currency Strategy is 108 days, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark GLD (350 days) in the same period.
• Looking at average days below previous high in of 110 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to GLD (159 days).