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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (75.9%) in the period of the last 5 years, the total return of 102.2% of ASML Holding is higher, thus better.
• During the last 3 years, the total return, or performance is 168.4%, which is greater, thus better than the value of 87.4% from the benchmark.

CAGR:

'Compound annual growth rate (CAGR) is a business and investing specific term for the geometric progression ratio that provides a constant rate of return over the time period. CAGR is not an accounting term, but it is often used to describe some element of the business, for example revenue, units delivered, registered users, etc. CAGR dampens the effect of volatility of periodic returns that can render arithmetic means irrelevant. It is particularly useful to compare growth rates from various data sets of common domain such as revenue growth of companies in the same industry.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (12%) in the period of the last 5 years, the annual performance (CAGR) of 15.2% of ASML Holding is larger, thus better.
• During the last 3 years, the annual performance (CAGR) is 39.2%, which is greater, thus better than the value of 23.4% from the benchmark.

Volatility:

'Volatility is a statistical measure of the dispersion of returns for a given security or market index. Volatility can either be measured by using the standard deviation or variance between returns from that same security or market index. Commonly, the higher the volatility, the riskier the security. In the securities markets, volatility is often associated with big swings in either direction. For example, when the stock market rises and falls more than one percent over a sustained period of time, it is called a 'volatile' market.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (17.2%) in the period of the last 5 years, the historical 30 days volatility of 43.6% of ASML Holding is higher, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the 30 days standard deviation is 43.7%, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 15.2% from the benchmark.

DownVol:

'The downside volatility is similar to the volatility, or standard deviation, but only takes losing/negative periods into account.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (11.8%) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside risk of 30.1% of ASML Holding is higher, thus worse.
• Looking at downside deviation in of 30.2% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (10.1%).

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.'

• Looking at the Sharpe Ratio of 0.29 in the last 5 years of ASML Holding, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.55)
• Looking at Sharpe Ratio in of 0.84 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (1.37).

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.'

• The excess return divided by the downside deviation over 5 years of ASML Holding is 0.42, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.8) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (2.07) in the period of the last 3 years, the excess return divided by the downside deviation of 1.22 is smaller, thus worse.

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 Ratio over 5 years of ASML Holding is 26 , which is greater, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (8.45 ) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the Ulcer Ratio is 21 , which is higher, thus worse than the value of 3.2 from the benchmark.

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 SPY (-24.5 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum DrawDown of -56.5 days of ASML Holding is lower, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (-18.8 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum reduction from previous high of -45.5 days is lower, thus worse.

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). Many assume Max DD Duration is the length of time between new highs during which the Max DD (magnitude) occurred. But that isn’t always the case. The Max DD duration is the longest time between peaks, period. So it could be the time when the program also had its biggest peak to valley loss (and usually is, because the program needs a long time to recover from the largest loss), but it doesn’t have to be'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (488 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum days under water of 546 days of ASML Holding is larger, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark is 349 days, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 87 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.'

• Looking at the average days below previous high of 182 days in the last 5 years of ASML Holding, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (118 days)
• Looking at average time in days below previous high water mark in of 101 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (17 days).