Johnson & Johnson (JNJ)

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 performance over 5 years of Johnson & Johnson is 81.4%, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (85.4%) in the same period.
• Looking at total return in of 72% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (75.6%).

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 annual performance (CAGR) of 12.7% in the last 5 years of Johnson & Johnson, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (13.2%)
• Compared with SPY (20.8%) in the period of the last 3 years, the annual return (CAGR) of 20% is smaller, thus worse.

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 historical 30 days volatility of 17.1% in the last 5 years of Johnson & Johnson, we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (17.2%)
• Compared with SPY (15.3%) in the period of the last 3 years, the 30 days standard deviation of 17.8% is higher, thus worse.

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 (11.8%) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside deviation of 11.5% of Johnson & Johnson is lower, thus better.
• During the last 3 years, the downside volatility is 11.8%, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 10.3% from the benchmark.

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 Johnson & Johnson is 0.6, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.62) in the same period.
• Looking at Sharpe Ratio in of 0.98 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (1.2).

Sortino:

'The Sortino ratio improves upon the Sharpe ratio by isolating downside volatility from total volatility by dividing excess return by the downside deviation. The Sortino ratio is a variation of the Sharpe ratio that differentiates harmful volatility from total overall volatility by using the asset's standard deviation of negative asset returns, called downside deviation. The Sortino ratio takes the asset's return and subtracts the risk-free rate, and then divides that amount by the asset's downside deviation. The ratio was named after Frank A. Sortino.'

• Looking at the excess return divided by the downside deviation of 0.89 in the last 5 years of Johnson & Johnson, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.9)
• Compared with SPY (1.78) in the period of the last 3 years, the downside risk / excess return profile of 1.48 is lower, thus worse.

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 Ratio over 5 years of Johnson & Johnson is 8.78 , which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (8.46 ) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the Ulcer Ratio is 7.47 , which is greater, thus worse than the value of 3.52 from the benchmark.

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 -18.4 days in the last 5 years of Johnson & Johnson, we see it is relatively larger, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (-24.5 days)
• During the last 3 years, the maximum DrawDown is -15.9 days, which is greater, thus better than the value of -18.8 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.'

• Looking at the maximum days below previous high of 812 days in the last 5 years of Johnson & Johnson, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (488 days)
• Looking at maximum days below previous high in of 394 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to SPY (87 days).

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 (119 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the average days under water of 295 days of Johnson & Johnson is larger, thus worse.
• Looking at average time in days below previous high water mark in of 127 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to SPY (20 days).