KLA (KLAC)

TotalReturn:

'Total return, when measuring performance, is the actual rate of return of an investment or a pool of investments over a given evaluation period. Total return includes interest, capital gains, dividends and distributions realized over a given period of time. Total return accounts for two categories of return: income including interest paid by fixed-income investments, distributions or dividends and capital appreciation, representing the change in the market price of an asset.'

• The total return, or increase in value over 5 years of KLA is 516.3%, which is larger, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (87.1%) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the total return, or increase in value is 401%, which is higher, thus better than the value of 85.7% from the benchmark.

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.'

• Looking at the annual performance (CAGR) of 44% in the last 5 years of KLA, we see it is relatively greater, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (13.4%)
• Compared with SPY (23%) in the period of the last 3 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 71.5% 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 42.9%, which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (17.1%) in the same period.
• Looking at historical 30 days volatility in of 43.1% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to SPY (15.1%).

DownVol:

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

• Looking at the downside risk of 29.3% in the last 5 years of KLA, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (11.8%)
• Compared with SPY (10.1%) in the period of the last 3 years, the downside volatility of 29.4% is larger, thus worse.

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.'

• Looking at the risk / return profile (Sharpe) of 0.97 in the last 5 years of KLA, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.64)
• During the last 3 years, the ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) is 1.6, which is greater, thus better than the value of 1.36 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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.93) in the period of the last 5 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of 1.42 of KLA is larger, thus better.
• Looking at excess return divided by the downside deviation in of 2.34 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus better in comparison to SPY (2.04).

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 (8.45 ) in the period of the last 5 years, the Ulcer Ratio of 14 of KLA is higher, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (3.5 ) 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.'

• The maximum reduction from previous high over 5 years of KLA is -40.3 days, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (-24.5 days) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (-18.8 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum drop from peak to valley of -34.9 days is lower, thus worse.

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'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (488 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark of 341 days of KLA is smaller, thus better.
• During the last 3 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark is 233 days, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 87 days from the benchmark.

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 below previous high of 81 days of KLA is lower, thus better.
• Compared with SPY (20 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the average days under water of 50 days is greater, thus worse.