Expedia Group (EXPE)

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.'

• The total return, or increase in value over 5 years of Expedia Group is -18.8%, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (88%) in the same period.
• Looking at total return in of -34% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to SPY (39.5%).

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 return (CAGR) over 5 years of Expedia Group is -4.1%, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (13.5%) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (11.7%) in the period of the last 3 years, the annual return (CAGR) of -12.9% is smaller, thus worse.

Volatility:

'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.'

• The volatility over 5 years of Expedia Group is 40.2%, which is greater, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (18.8%) in the same period.
• Looking at volatility in of 46.7% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (22.3%).

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.'

• The downside risk over 5 years of Expedia Group is 30.2%, which is larger, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (13.7%) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (16.5%) in the period of the last 3 years, the downside volatility of 35.8% is greater, thus worse.

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.'

• The ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) over 5 years of Expedia Group is -0.16, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.58) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the risk / return profile (Sharpe) is -0.33, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 0.41 from the benchmark.

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 excess return divided by the downside deviation over 5 years of Expedia Group is -0.22, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.8) in the same period.
• Looking at excess return divided by the downside deviation in of -0.43 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to SPY (0.56).

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 (5.79 ) in the period of the last 5 years, the Ulcer Index of 25 of Expedia Group is higher, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (7.08 ) in the period of the last 3 years, the Ulcer Ratio of 28 is larger, thus worse.

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.'

• Looking at the maximum DrawDown of -70.5 days in the last 5 years of Expedia Group, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (-33.7 days)
• During the last 3 years, the maximum reduction from previous high is -69.4 days, which is lower, thus worse than the value of -33.7 days from the benchmark.

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) in days.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (139 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum days under water of 796 days of Expedia Group is greater, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (139 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum days below previous high of 738 days is higher, thus worse.

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 time in days below previous high water mark over 5 years of Expedia Group is 313 days, which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (37 days) in the same period.
• Looking at average days below previous high in of 363 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (45 days).