Description

KLA Corporation designs, manufactures, and markets process control and yield management solutions for the semiconductor and related nanoelectronics industries worldwide. The company offers chip and wafer manufacturing products, including defect inspection and review systems, metrology solutions, in situ process monitoring products, computational lithography software, and data analytics systems for chip manufacturers to manage yield throughout the semiconductor fabrication process. It also provides reticle manufacturing products, such as reticle inspection, metrology, and data analytics systems for mask shops; and packaging manufacturing products comprising packaging process control on wafer, automated optical inspection, data analytics, and packaging process control after singulation. In addition, the company offers compound semiconductor, power device, light emitting diode, and microelectromechanical system manufacturing products; data storage media/head manufacturing products; general purpose/lab applications; and previous-generation KLA systems. Further, it provides wafer processing solutions; printed circuit boards, and display and inspection components; products for the deposition of thin film coating of materials on crystalline silicon photovoltaic wafers; and other services. The company offers its products and services for use by various bare wafer, integrated circuit, reticle, and hard disk drive manufacturers. The company was formerly known as KLA-Tencor Corporation and changed its name to KLA Corporation in July 2019. KLA Corporation was founded in 1975 and is headquartered in Milpitas, California.

Statistics (YTD)

What do these metrics mean? [Read More] [Hide]

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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:
  • Looking at the total return of 434.9% in the last 5 years of KLA, we see it is relatively larger, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (94.2%)
  • During the last 3 years, the total return, or performance is 318.5%, which is greater, thus better than the value of 81.9% from the benchmark.

CAGR:

'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:
  • Compared with the benchmark SPY (14.3%) in the period of the last 5 years, the annual performance (CAGR) of 40% of KLA is larger, thus better.
  • During the last 3 years, the annual performance (CAGR) is 61.6%, which is higher, thus better than the value of 22.2% from the benchmark.

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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:
  • Compared with the benchmark SPY (17%) in the period of the last 5 years, the historical 30 days volatility of 42.8% of KLA is higher, thus worse.
  • During the last 3 years, the historical 30 days volatility is 42%, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 15.1% from the benchmark.

DownVol:

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

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:
  • The downside volatility over 5 years of KLA is 29.3%, which is greater, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (11.7%) in the same period.
  • During the last 3 years, the downside risk is 28.7%, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 10.1% from the benchmark.

Sharpe:

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:
  • Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.69) in the period of the last 5 years, the Sharpe Ratio of 0.88 of KLA is larger, thus better.
  • During the last 3 years, the risk / return profile (Sharpe) is 1.41, which is greater, thus better than the value of 1.3 from the benchmark.

Sortino:

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:
  • Looking at the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of 1.28 in the last 5 years of KLA, we see it is relatively larger, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (1)
  • Looking at excess return divided by the downside deviation in of 2.06 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to SPY (1.95).

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.'

Which means for our asset as example:
  • The Ulcer Index over 5 years of KLA is 14 , which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (8.42 ) in the same period.
  • Compared with SPY (3.4 ) in the period of the last 3 years, the Downside risk index of 12 is higher, thus worse.

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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:
  • The maximum DrawDown over 5 years of KLA is -40.3 days, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (-24.5 days) in the same period.
  • Looking at maximum DrawDown in of -34.9 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (-18.8 days).

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). Many assume Max DD Duration is the length of time between new highs during which the Max DD (magnitude) occurred. But that isn’t always the case. The Max DD duration is the longest time between peaks, period. So it could be the time when the program also had its biggest peak to valley loss (and usually is, because the program needs a long time to recover from the largest loss), but it doesn’t have to be'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:
  • The maximum days below previous high over 5 years of KLA is 341 days, which is smaller, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (488 days) in the same period.
  • Compared with SPY (87 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark of 233 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.'

Which means for our asset as example:
  • The average days under water over 5 years of KLA is 85 days, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (119 days) in the same period.
  • During the last 3 years, the average time in days below previous high water mark is 49 days, which is higher, thus worse than the value of 19 days from the benchmark.

Performance (YTD)

Historical returns have been extended using synthetic data.

Allocations ()

Allocations

Returns (%)

  • Note that yearly returns do not equal the sum of monthly returns due to compounding.
  • Performance results of KLA are hypothetical and do not account for slippage, fees or taxes.