'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (64.1%) in the period of the last 5 years, the total return, or performance of 65% of Expedia Group is higher, thus better.
- Compared with SPY (48.1%) in the period of the last 3 years, the total return of 30.2% is lower, thus worse.

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- The annual performance (CAGR) over 5 years of Expedia Group is 10.5%, which is larger, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (10.4%) in the same period.
- During the last 3 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) is 9.2%, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 14% from the benchmark.

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- The 30 days standard deviation over 5 years of Expedia Group is 29.9%, which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (13.6%) in the same period.
- Looking at 30 days standard deviation in of 26.1% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (12.8%).

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (14.9%) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside deviation of 30.8% of Expedia Group is greater, thus worse.
- During the last 3 years, the downside risk is 29.6%, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 14.5% from the benchmark.

'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 Sharpe Ratio of 0.27 in the last 5 years of Expedia Group, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.58)
- Compared with SPY (0.9) in the period of the last 3 years, the risk / return profile (Sharpe) of 0.26 is smaller, thus worse.

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Looking at the downside risk / excess return profile of 0.26 in the last 5 years of Expedia Group, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.53)
- Looking at excess return divided by the downside deviation in of 0.23 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (0.79).

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- The Ulcer Ratio over 5 years of Expedia Group is 17 , which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (4.02 ) in the same period.
- During the last 3 years, the Ulcer Index is 19 , which is greater, thus worse than the value of 4.09 from the benchmark.

'A maximum drawdown is the maximum loss from a peak to a trough of a portfolio, before a new peak is attained. Maximum Drawdown is an indicator of downside risk over a specified time period. It can be used both as a stand-alone measure or as an input into other metrics such as 'Return over Maximum Drawdown' and the Calmar Ratio. Maximum Drawdown is expressed in percentage terms.'

Which means for our asset as example:- Looking at the maximum DrawDown of -37 days in the last 5 years of Expedia Group, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (-19.3 days)
- During the last 3 years, the maximum reduction from previous high is -37 days, which is lower, thus worse than the value of -19.3 days from the benchmark.

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- The maximum days under water over 5 years of Expedia Group is 540 days, which is greater, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (187 days) in the same period.
- Looking at maximum time in days below previous high water mark in of 540 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (139 days).

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- The average time in days below previous high water mark over 5 years of Expedia Group is 181 days, which is larger, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (41 days) in the same period.
- Compared with SPY (35 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the average days below previous high of 211 days is larger, thus worse.

Historical returns have been extended using synthetic data.
[Show Details]

- "Year" returns in the table above are not equal to the sum of monthly returns due to compounding.
- Performance results of Expedia Group 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.