In this paper we prove that partial-moments-based performance measures (e.g., Omega, Kappa, upside-potential ratio, Sortino–Satchell ratio, Farinelli–Tibiletti ratio), value-at-risk-based performance measures (e.g., VaR ratio, CVaR ratio, Rachev ratio, generalized Rachev ratio), and other admissible performance measures are a strictly increasing function in the Sharpe ratio. The theoretical basis of this result is the location and scale property and two other plausible and mild conditions. Our result provides a decision-theoretic foundation for all these frequently used performance measures. Moreover, it might explain the empirical finding that all these measures typically lead to very similar rankings.

The least restrictive sufficient condition for expected utility to imply Sharpe ratio rankings is the location and scale (LS) property (see Sinn, 1983, Meyer, 1987). The normal, the extreme value, and many other distributions commonly used in finance satisfy this property. We argue that the LS property is also sufficient for expected utility to imply drawdown-based performance measure rankings, because for investment funds satisfying the LS condition, the Sharpe ratio and drawdown-based performance measures result in identical rankings. Hence, the same conditions that provide an expected utility foundation for the Sharpe ratio also provide a foundation for drawdown-based performance measures. We conclude that from a decision-theoretic perspective, drawdown-based performance measures are as good as the Sharpe ratio.