Cerner (CERN)

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 (62.4%) in the period of the last 5 years, the total return, or performance of 0.4% of Cerner is smaller, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the total return, or increase in value is 31.2%, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 39.3% from the benchmark.

CAGR:

'The compound annual growth rate (CAGR) is a useful measure of growth over multiple time periods. It can be thought of as the growth rate that gets you from the initial investment value to the ending investment value if you assume that the investment has been compounding over the time period.'

• The annual performance (CAGR) over 5 years of Cerner is 0.1%, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (10.2%) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the annual return (CAGR) is 9.5%, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of 11.7% 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 (13.5%) in the period of the last 5 years, the 30 days standard deviation of 24% of Cerner is higher, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the volatility is 23%, which is higher, thus worse than the value of 13.2% 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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (9.8%) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside volatility of 17.4% of Cerner is higher, thus worse.
• Looking at downside risk in of 16.3% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to SPY (9.8%).

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 Cerner is -0.1, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.57) in the same period.
• Looking at Sharpe Ratio in of 0.3 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (0.69).

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.78) in the period of the last 5 years, the excess return divided by the downside deviation of -0.14 of Cerner is lower, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (0.94) in the period of the last 3 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of 0.43 is smaller, thus worse.

Ulcer:

'The ulcer index is a stock market risk measure or technical analysis indicator devised by Peter Martin in 1987, and published by him and Byron McCann in their 1989 book The Investors Guide to Fidelity Funds. It's designed as a measure of volatility, but only volatility in the downward direction, i.e. the amount of drawdown or retracement occurring over a period. Other volatility measures like standard deviation treat up and down movement equally, but a trader doesn't mind upward movement, it's the downside that causes stress and stomach ulcers that the index's name suggests.'

• Looking at the Ulcer Index of 18 in the last 5 years of Cerner, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (3.98 )
• Looking at Ulcer Index in of 13 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to SPY (4.12 ).

MaxDD:

'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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (-19.3 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum reduction from previous high of -36.8 days of Cerner is smaller, thus worse.
• Looking at maximum reduction from previous high in of -33.5 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to SPY (-19.3 days).

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 (187 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum days under water of 1063 days of Cerner is larger, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the maximum days below previous high is 428 days, which is higher, thus worse than the value of 139 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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (42 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the average days under water of 462 days of Cerner is higher, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the average days under water is 142 days, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 37 days from the benchmark.