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:

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:
  • The total return over 5 years of KLA is 452.5%, which is higher, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (82.3%) in the same period.
  • Compared with SPY (69.4%) in the period of the last 3 years, the total return, or increase in value of 264.9% is larger, thus better.

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 (12.8%) in the period of the last 5 years, the annual performance (CAGR) of 40.9% of KLA is larger, thus better.
  • Looking at annual return (CAGR) in of 54.2% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to SPY (19.3%).

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.'

Which means for our asset as example:
  • The 30 days standard deviation over 5 years of KLA is 46.1%, which is greater, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (17.2%) in the same period.
  • During the last 3 years, the volatility is 48.2%, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 15.3% 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 deviation over 5 years of KLA is 31.6%, which is larger, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (11.8%) in the same period.
  • Looking at downside deviation in of 33.4% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (10.3%).

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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:
  • Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.6) in the period of the last 5 years, the risk / return profile (Sharpe) of 0.83 of KLA is larger, thus better.
  • Compared with SPY (1.09) in the period of the last 3 years, the ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) of 1.07 is lower, thus worse.

Sortino:

'The Sortino ratio measures the risk-adjusted return of an investment asset, portfolio, or strategy. It is a modification of the Sharpe ratio but penalizes only those returns falling below a user-specified target or required rate of return, while the Sharpe ratio penalizes both upside and downside volatility equally. Though both ratios measure an investment's risk-adjusted return, they do so in significantly different ways that will frequently lead to differing conclusions as to the true nature of the investment's return-generating efficiency. The Sortino ratio is used as a way to compare the risk-adjusted performance of programs with differing risk and return profiles. In general, risk-adjusted returns seek to normalize the risk across programs and then see which has the higher return unit per risk.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:
  • Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.87) in the period of the last 5 years, the excess return divided by the downside deviation of 1.22 of KLA is larger, thus better.
  • Compared with SPY (1.62) in the period of the last 3 years, the excess return divided by the downside deviation of 1.55 is lower, thus worse.

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 15 , which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (8.45 ) in the same period.
  • Compared with SPY (3.53 ) in the period of the last 3 years, the Ulcer Ratio of 13 is greater, 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.'

Which means for our asset as example:
  • Compared with the benchmark SPY (-24.5 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum DrawDown of -43.6 days of KLA is smaller, thus worse.
  • During the last 3 years, the maximum DrawDown is -43.6 days, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of -18.8 days from the benchmark.

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.'

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 lower, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (488 days) in the same period.
  • Looking at maximum time in days below previous high water mark 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 Drawdown Duration is the length of any peak to peak period, or the time between new equity highs. 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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:
  • Compared with the benchmark SPY (119 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the average days under water of 82 days of KLA is lower, thus better.
  • Looking at average days below previous high in of 50 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (21 days).

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.