'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (46.1%) in the period of the last 5 years, the total return, or increase in value of 202.5% of KLA is higher, thus better.
- Looking at total return in of 70% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus better in comparison to SPY (23.5%).

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Looking at the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 24.8% in the last 5 years of KLA, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (7.9%)
- During the last 3 years, the annual performance (CAGR) is 19.4%, which is higher, thus better than the value of 7.3% from the benchmark.

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- Looking at the historical 30 days volatility of 35.9% in the last 5 years of KLA, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (18.3%)
- During the last 3 years, the historical 30 days volatility is 41.6%, which is higher, thus worse than the value of 20.8% from the benchmark.

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

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (13.4%) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside risk of 23.8% of KLA is higher, thus worse.
- Looking at downside deviation in of 28% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to SPY (15.4%).

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- The ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) over 5 years of KLA is 0.62, which is higher, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (0.29) in the same period.
- Looking at ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) in of 0.41 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to SPY (0.23).

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.4) in the period of the last 5 years, the excess return divided by the downside deviation of 0.94 of KLA is larger, thus better.
- During the last 3 years, the excess return divided by the downside deviation is 0.6, which is greater, thus better than the value of 0.31 from the benchmark.

'The Ulcer Index is a technical indicator that measures downside risk, in terms of both the depth and duration of price declines. The index increases in value as the price moves farther away from a recent high and falls as the price rises to new highs. The indicator is usually calculated over a 14-day period, with the Ulcer Index showing the percentage drawdown a trader can expect from the high over that period. The greater the value of the Ulcer Index, the longer it takes for a stock to get back to the former high.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Looking at the Downside risk index of 10 in the last 5 years of KLA, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (5.27 )
- Looking at Ulcer Ratio in of 12 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (6.08 ).

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Looking at the maximum DrawDown of -37.2 days in the last 5 years of KLA, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (-33.7 days)
- Compared with SPY (-33.7 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum reduction from previous high of -37.2 days is lower, thus worse.

'The Maximum 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. It is the length of time the account was in the Max Drawdown. A Max Drawdown measures a retrenchment from when an equity curve reaches a new high. It’s the maximum an account lost during that retrenchment. This method is applied because a valley can’t be measured until a new high occurs. Once the new high is reached, the percentage change from the old high to the bottom of the largest trough is recorded.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Looking at the maximum days under water of 253 days in the last 5 years of KLA, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (187 days)
- Looking at maximum days under water in of 253 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, 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:- Looking at the average time in days below previous high water mark of 48 days in the last 5 years of KLA, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (42 days)
- During the last 3 years, the average time in days below previous high water mark is 61 days, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 36 days from the benchmark.

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

- Note that yearly returns do not equal the sum of monthly returns due to compounding.
- Performance results of KLA 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.