Minimum Volatility Portfolio

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 Minimum Volatility Portfolio is 36.6%, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (94.6%) in the same period.
• Looking at total return in of 11.8% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (28.1%).

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 SPY (14.3%) in the period of the last 5 years, the annual return (CAGR) of 6.4% of Minimum Volatility Portfolio is smaller, thus worse.
• Looking at annual return (CAGR) in of 3.8% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (8.6%).

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 historical 30 days volatility over 5 years of Minimum Volatility Portfolio is 4.6%, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (20.9%) in the same period.
• Looking at 30 days standard deviation in of 2.9% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to SPY (17.4%).

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (15%) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside risk of 3.4% of Minimum Volatility Portfolio is lower, thus better.
• Looking at downside risk in of 1.9% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to SPY (12.1%).

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 (0.56) in the period of the last 5 years, the ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) of 0.86 of Minimum Volatility Portfolio is larger, thus better.
• Compared with SPY (0.35) in the period of the last 3 years, the risk / return profile (Sharpe) of 0.45 is greater, thus better.

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.78) in the period of the last 5 years, the excess return divided by the downside deviation of 1.16 of Minimum Volatility Portfolio is higher, thus better.
• During the last 3 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation is 0.7, which is higher, thus better than the value of 0.5 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 Minimum Volatility Portfolio is 1.48 , which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (9.32 ) in the same period.
• Looking at Ulcer Ratio in of 1.13 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to SPY (10 ).

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 drop from peak to valley over 5 years of Minimum Volatility Portfolio is -12.1 days, which is greater, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (-33.7 days) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (-24.5 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum reduction from previous high of -2.7 days is greater, thus better.

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 below previous high over 5 years of Minimum Volatility Portfolio is 291 days, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (488 days) in the same period.
• Looking at maximum days under water in of 291 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to SPY (488 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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (122 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the average days under water of 59 days of Minimum Volatility Portfolio is lower, thus better.
• Compared with SPY (178 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the average days below previous high of 78 days is lower, thus better.