ASML Holding (ASML)

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 ASML Holding is 119.3%, which is greater, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (106.2%) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the total return, or increase in value is 65.1%, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of 69.9% 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 annual return (CAGR) over 5 years of ASML Holding is 17.1%, which is higher, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (15.6%) in the same period.
• Looking at annual performance (CAGR) in of 18.3% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to SPY (19.5%).

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.'

• Looking at the historical 30 days volatility of 41.3% in the last 5 years of ASML Holding, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (17.6%)
• During the last 3 years, the historical 30 days volatility is 42.3%, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 17.7% from the benchmark.

DownVol:

'Downside risk is the financial risk associated with losses. That is, it is the risk of the actual return being below the expected return, or the uncertainty about the magnitude of that difference. 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 28.6% in the last 5 years of ASML Holding, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (12.2%)
• Compared with SPY (11.6%) in the period of the last 3 years, the downside volatility of 29.1% is higher, thus worse.

Sharpe:

'The Sharpe ratio is the measure of risk-adjusted return of a financial portfolio. Sharpe ratio is a measure of excess portfolio return over the risk-free rate relative to its standard deviation. Normally, the 90-day Treasury bill rate is taken as the proxy for risk-free rate. A portfolio with a higher Sharpe ratio is considered superior relative to its peers. The measure was named after William F Sharpe, a Nobel laureate and professor of finance, emeritus at Stanford University.'

• The risk / return profile (Sharpe) over 5 years of ASML Holding is 0.35, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.74) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) is 0.37, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of 0.96 from the benchmark.

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.'

• The excess return divided by the downside deviation over 5 years of ASML Holding is 0.51, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (1.08) in the same period.
• Looking at downside risk / excess return profile in of 0.54 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (1.46).

Ulcer:

'The Ulcer Index is a technical indicator that measures downside risk, in terms of both the depth and duration of price declines. The index increases in value as the price moves farther away from a recent high and falls as the price rises to new highs. The indicator is usually calculated over a 14-day period, with the Ulcer Index showing the percentage drawdown a trader can expect from the high over that period. The greater the value of the Ulcer Index, the longer it takes for a stock to get back to the former high.'

• The Downside risk index over 5 years of ASML Holding is 25 , which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (8.48 ) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the Downside risk index is 20 , which is larger, thus worse than the value of 5.32 from the benchmark.

MaxDD:

'A maximum drawdown is the maximum loss from a peak to a trough of a portfolio, before a new peak is attained. Maximum Drawdown is an indicator of downside risk over a specified time period. It can be used both as a stand-alone measure or as an input into other metrics such as 'Return over Maximum Drawdown' and the Calmar Ratio. Maximum Drawdown is expressed in percentage terms.'

• The maximum drop from peak to valley over 5 years of ASML Holding is -56.8 days, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (-24.5 days) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (-18.8 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum DrawDown of -45.5 days is lower, thus worse.

MaxDuration:

'The Maximum 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. It is the length of time the account was in the Max Drawdown. A Max Drawdown measures a retrenchment from when an equity curve reaches a new high. It’s the maximum an account lost during that retrenchment. This method is applied because a valley can’t be measured until a new high occurs. Once the new high is reached, the percentage change from the old high to the bottom of the largest trough is recorded.'

• Looking at the maximum days below previous high of 592 days in the last 5 years of ASML Holding, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (488 days)
• During the last 3 years, the maximum days below previous high is 235 days, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 199 days from the benchmark.

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.'

• The average days below previous high over 5 years of ASML Holding is 179 days, which is greater, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (120 days) in the same period.
• Looking at average time in days below previous high water mark in of 60 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (46 days).