KLA (KLAC)

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.'

• Looking at the total return of 797% in the last 5 years of KLA, we see it is relatively greater, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (92.6%)
• Looking at total return, or performance in of 472.7% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to SPY (76.4%).

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 performance (CAGR) over 5 years of KLA is 55.4%, which is greater, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (14.1%) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (20.9%) in the period of the last 3 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 79.3% is higher, thus better.

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 volatility over 5 years of KLA is 44.1%, which is larger, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (17.1%) in the same period.
• Looking at volatility in of 45% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (15.2%).

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 volatility of 29.6% in the last 5 years of KLA, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (11.8%)
• Looking at downside deviation in of 30.3% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (10.2%).

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.'

• Looking at the ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) of 1.2 in the last 5 years of KLA, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.67)
• During the last 3 years, the Sharpe Ratio is 1.71, which is higher, thus better than the value of 1.21 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.'

• The ratio of annual return and downside deviation over 5 years of KLA is 1.79, which is greater, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (0.98) in the same period.
• Looking at excess return divided by the downside deviation in of 2.53 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to SPY (1.8).

Ulcer:

'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.'

• Looking at the Ulcer Index of 14 in the last 5 years of KLA, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (8.45 )
• During the last 3 years, the Downside risk index is 12 , which is higher, thus worse than the value of 3.51 from the benchmark.

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (-24.5 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum DrawDown of -40.3 days of KLA is lower, thus worse.
• Looking at maximum drop from peak to valley in of -34.9 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, 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'

• The maximum time in days below previous high water mark over 5 years of KLA is 341 days, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (488 days) in the same period.
• Looking at maximum days below previous high in of 233 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, 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.'

• The average days below previous high over 5 years of KLA is 82 days, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (120 days) in the same period.
• Looking at average time in days below previous high water mark in of 50 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to SPY (20 days).