Discovery (DISCA)

TotalReturn:

'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 investment’s overall performance.'

• The total return over 5 years of Discovery is -16.4%, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (121.8%) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (52.8%) in the period of the last 3 years, the total return, or increase in value of -15.4% is lower, thus worse.

CAGR:

'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.'

• Looking at the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of -3.5% in the last 5 years of Discovery, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (17.3%)
• Looking at annual return (CAGR) in of -5.4% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to SPY (15.3%).

Volatility:

'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.'

• The 30 days standard deviation over 5 years of Discovery is 43.8%, which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (17.9%) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the volatility is 49.1%, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 18.4% from the benchmark.

DownVol:

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

• Looking at the downside deviation of 31.5% in the last 5 years of Discovery, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (12.4%)
• During the last 3 years, the downside deviation is 35.5%, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 12.4% from the benchmark.

Sharpe:

'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.'

• The risk / return profile (Sharpe) over 5 years of Discovery is -0.14, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.83) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (0.7) in the period of the last 3 years, the ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) of -0.16 is lower, thus worse.

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.'

• The ratio of annual return and downside deviation over 5 years of Discovery is -0.19, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (1.19) in the same period.
• Looking at excess return divided by the downside deviation in of -0.22 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (1.03).

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 Index over 5 years of Discovery is 35 , which is larger, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (8.48 ) in the same period.
• Looking at Ulcer Index in of 41 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (5.55 ).

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 (-24.5 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum drop from peak to valley of -71.2 days of Discovery is lower, thus worse.
• Looking at maximum drop from peak to valley in of -71.2 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (-18.8 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'

• The maximum time in days below previous high water mark over 5 years of Discovery is 541 days, which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (488 days) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (199 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark of 278 days is larger, thus worse.

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 under water of 196 days in the last 5 years of Discovery, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (119 days)
• During the last 3 years, the average days under water is 111 days, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 45 days from the benchmark.