Cognizant (CTSH)

TotalReturn:

'Total return, when measuring performance, is the actual rate of return of an investment or a pool of investments over a given evaluation period. Total return includes interest, capital gains, dividends and distributions realized over a given period of time. Total return accounts for two categories of return: income including interest paid by fixed-income investments, distributions or dividends and capital appreciation, representing the change in the market price of an asset.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (120.7%) in the period of the last 5 years, the total return of 44.7% of Cognizant is lower, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the total return, or performance is 11.4%, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of 44% 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.'

• Looking at the annual return (CAGR) of 7.7% in the last 5 years of Cognizant, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (17.2%)
• During the last 3 years, the annual performance (CAGR) is 3.7%, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 12.9% 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.'

• Looking at the 30 days standard deviation of 30.1% in the last 5 years of Cognizant, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (18.8%)
• Compared with SPY (22.8%) in the period of the last 3 years, the historical 30 days volatility of 33.7% is higher, thus worse.

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 (13.6%) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside volatility of 21.6% of Cognizant is higher, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the downside volatility is 23.9%, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 16.7% from the benchmark.

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.78) in the period of the last 5 years, the Sharpe Ratio of 0.17 of Cognizant is smaller, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (0.46) in the period of the last 3 years, the Sharpe Ratio of 0.03 is smaller, thus worse.

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.'

• Looking at the downside risk / excess return profile of 0.24 in the last 5 years of Cognizant, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (1.08)
• Compared with SPY (0.62) in the period of the last 3 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of 0.05 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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (5.59 ) in the period of the last 5 years, the Ulcer Index of 17 of Cognizant is larger, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (7.15 ) in the period of the last 3 years, the Downside risk index of 21 is greater, thus worse.

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.'

• Looking at the maximum reduction from previous high of -49.8 days in the last 5 years of Cognizant, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (-33.7 days)
• Compared with SPY (-33.7 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum drop from peak to valley of -49.8 days is smaller, 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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (139 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum days under water of 714 days of Cognizant is greater, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the maximum days below previous high is 714 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.'

• The average days under water over 5 years of Cognizant is 256 days, which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (33 days) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the average days under water is 346 days, which is higher, thus worse than the value of 45 days from the benchmark.