'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- The total return over 5 years of CDW is 141%, which is greater, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (80%) in the same period.
- During the last 3 years, the total return, or increase in value is 67.1%, which is larger, thus better than the value of 31.8% from the benchmark.

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- The compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) over 5 years of CDW is 19.3%, which is higher, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (12.5%) in the same period.
- Compared with SPY (9.7%) in the period of the last 3 years, the annual performance (CAGR) of 18.7% is larger, thus better.

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (21.3%) in the period of the last 5 years, the 30 days standard deviation of 32.8% of CDW is greater, thus worse.
- Looking at volatility in of 26.8% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (17.6%).

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

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Looking at the downside deviation of 23.2% in the last 5 years of CDW, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (15.3%)
- During the last 3 years, the downside volatility is 18.8%, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 12.3% from the benchmark.

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Looking at the risk / return profile (Sharpe) of 0.51 in the last 5 years of CDW, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.47)
- Compared with SPY (0.41) in the period of the last 3 years, the Sharpe Ratio of 0.6 is higher, thus better.

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- The excess return divided by the downside deviation over 5 years of CDW is 0.72, which is larger, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (0.66) in the same period.
- Compared with SPY (0.58) in the period of the last 3 years, the excess return divided by the downside deviation of 0.86 is greater, thus better.

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (9.43 ) in the period of the last 5 years, the Ulcer Ratio of 13 of CDW is larger, thus worse.
- Looking at Downside risk index in of 12 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (10 ).

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (-33.7 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum reduction from previous high of -44.8 days of CDW is lower, thus worse.
- During the last 3 years, the maximum reduction from previous high is -26 days, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of -24.5 days from the benchmark.

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (480 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark of 277 days of CDW is lower, thus better.
- Compared with SPY (480 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum days under water of 277 days is lower, thus better.

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (119 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the average days below previous high of 71 days of CDW is lower, thus better.
- Looking at average days below previous high in of 77 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to SPY (174 days).

Historical returns have been extended using synthetic data.
[Show Details]

- Note that yearly returns do not equal the sum of monthly returns due to compounding.
- Performance results of CDW are hypothetical, do not account for slippage, fees or taxes, and are based on backtesting, which has many inherent limitations, some of which are described in our Terms of Use.