'Total return is the amount of value an investor earns from a security over a specific period, typically one year, when all distributions are reinvested. Total return is expressed as a percentage of the amount invested. For example, a total return of 20% means the security increased by 20% of its original value due to a price increase, distribution of dividends (if a stock), coupons (if a bond) or capital gains (if a fund). Total return is a strong measure of an investmentâ€™s overall performance.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Looking at the total return, or performance of 146% in the last 5 years of CDW, we see it is relatively larger, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (94.8%)
- Looking at total return in of 46.2% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus better in comparison to SPY (31.6%).

'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:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (14.3%) in the period of the last 5 years, the annual return (CAGR) of 19.8% of CDW is greater, thus better.
- During the last 3 years, the annual return (CAGR) is 13.5%, which is larger, thus better than the value of 9.6% from the benchmark.

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Looking at the 30 days standard deviation of 32.2% in the last 5 years of CDW, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (20.9%)
- During the last 3 years, the 30 days standard deviation is 25.8%, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 17.3% from the benchmark.

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Looking at the downside risk of 22.8% in the last 5 years of CDW, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (15%)
- Compared with SPY (12.1%) in the period of the last 3 years, the downside volatility of 18.5% is larger, thus worse.

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Looking at the ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) of 0.54 in the last 5 years of CDW, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.56)
- During the last 3 years, the Sharpe Ratio is 0.43, which is higher, thus better than the value of 0.41 from the benchmark.

'The Sortino ratio improves upon the Sharpe ratio by isolating downside volatility from total volatility by dividing excess return by the downside deviation. The Sortino ratio is a variation of the Sharpe ratio that differentiates harmful volatility from total overall volatility by using the asset's standard deviation of negative asset returns, called downside deviation. The Sortino ratio takes the asset's return and subtracts the risk-free rate, and then divides that amount by the asset's downside deviation. The ratio was named after Frank A. Sortino.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Looking at the excess return divided by the downside deviation of 0.76 in the last 5 years of CDW, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.79)
- Looking at excess return divided by the downside deviation in of 0.6 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus better in comparison to SPY (0.59).

'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 (9.33 ) in the period of the last 5 years, the Downside risk index of 13 of CDW is higher, thus worse.
- Compared with SPY (10 ) in the period of the last 3 years, the Downside risk index of 12 is greater, thus worse.

'Maximum drawdown is defined as the peak-to-trough decline of an investment during a specific period. It is usually quoted as a percentage of the peak value. The maximum drawdown can be calculated based on absolute returns, in order to identify strategies that suffer less during market downturns, such as low-volatility strategies. However, the maximum drawdown can also be calculated based on returns relative to a benchmark index, for identifying strategies that show steady outperformance over time.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Looking at the maximum drop from peak to valley of -44.8 days in the last 5 years of CDW, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (-33.7 days)
- Looking at maximum DrawDown in of -26 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to SPY (-24.5 days).

'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) in days.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- The maximum days under water over 5 years of CDW is 277 days, which is smaller, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (488 days) in the same period.
- Compared with SPY (488 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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- Looking at the average time in days below previous high water mark of 71 days in the last 5 years of CDW, we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (123 days)
- Looking at average days under water in of 77 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to SPY (179 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.