Johnson & Johnson (JNJ)

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (115.2%) in the period of the last 5 years, the total return of 25.2% of Johnson & Johnson is lower, thus worse.
• Looking at total return in of -5.8% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to SPY (70.9%).

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 Johnson & Johnson is 4.6%, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (16.6%) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the annual return (CAGR) is -2%, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 19.7% from the benchmark.

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 historical 30 days volatility over 5 years of Johnson & Johnson is 16.7%, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (17.6%) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (17.5%) in the period of the last 3 years, the volatility of 16.9% is lower, thus better.

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.'

• Looking at the downside deviation of 11.7% in the last 5 years of Johnson & Johnson, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (12.1%)
• During the last 3 years, the downside risk is 12.3%, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 11.6% 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 (0.81) in the period of the last 5 years, the ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) of 0.13 of Johnson & Johnson is smaller, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) is -0.26, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 0.98 from the benchmark.

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 0.18 in the last 5 years of Johnson & Johnson, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (1.17)
• Looking at excess return divided by the downside deviation in of -0.37 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (1.49).

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (8.48 ) in the period of the last 5 years, the Ulcer Ratio of 8.76 of Johnson & Johnson is greater, thus worse.
• Looking at Ulcer Ratio in of 9.51 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (5.31 ).

MaxDD:

'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.'

• Looking at the maximum drop from peak to valley of -18.4 days in the last 5 years of Johnson & Johnson, we see it is relatively greater, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (-24.5 days)
• Compared with SPY (-18.8 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum reduction from previous high of -17.4 days is higher, thus better.

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 under water of 797 days in the last 5 years of Johnson & Johnson, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (488 days)
• Compared with SPY (199 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum days below previous high of 620 days is greater, 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.'

• Looking at the average time in days below previous high water mark of 279 days in the last 5 years of Johnson & Johnson, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (120 days)
• Looking at average days under water in of 267 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (47 days).