I have learnt that the Sharpe ratio is a measure of the annualized return rate mean over the annualised standard deviation of return rate distribution. I also learnt that when compounding, the mean of the return rate distribution does not correspond to the overall return rate at the end of the test period (the classic example is : I have 100 USD, then I loose 50%, then I gain 50% I end up with 75 USD which is an overall return of -25%, while return mean is 0%).
Since the return mean does not correspond to reality in most of the case (i.e., when the return is compounded), why the Sharpe ratio does not take the cumulative return (i.e, exp(sum of log returns)) as a numerator rather than the mean of return rates ?
Please note that I've made a lot of research on Google and StackExchange and there seem not to be a definitive standard response to this question.