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:
  • Compared with the benchmark SPY (97.2%) in the period of the last 5 years, the total return of 444.1% of KLA is higher, thus better.
  • Looking at total return in of 284.4% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to SPY (80.6%).

CAGR:

'The compound annual growth rate isn't a true return rate, but rather a representational figure. It is essentially a number that describes the rate at which an investment would have grown if it had grown the same rate every year and the profits were reinvested at the end of each year. In reality, this sort of performance is unlikely. However, CAGR can be used to smooth returns so that they may be more easily understood when compared to alternative investments.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:
  • The annual performance (CAGR) over 5 years of KLA is 40.5%, which is larger, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (14.6%) in the same period.
  • Looking at annual performance (CAGR) in of 56.8% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus better in comparison to SPY (21.8%).

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 42.6%, which is greater, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (17.1%) in the same period.
  • Looking at volatility in of 40.8% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (15.2%).

DownVol:

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:
  • The downside deviation over 5 years of KLA is 28.8%, which is greater, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (11.8%) in the same period.
  • Looking at downside volatility in of 27.5% 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 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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:
  • Looking at the risk / return profile (Sharpe) of 0.89 in the last 5 years of KLA, we see it is relatively greater, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.71)
  • Looking at Sharpe Ratio in of 1.33 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to SPY (1.27).

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:
  • Looking at the excess return divided by the downside deviation of 1.32 in the last 5 years of KLA, we see it is relatively greater, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (1.03)
  • Compared with SPY (1.9) in the period of the last 3 years, the downside risk / excess return profile of 1.97 is greater, thus better.

Ulcer:

'The ulcer index is a stock market risk measure or technical analysis indicator devised by Peter Martin in 1987, and published by him and Byron McCann in their 1989 book The Investors Guide to Fidelity Funds. It's designed as a measure of volatility, but only volatility in the downward direction, i.e. the amount of drawdown or retracement occurring over a period. Other volatility measures like standard deviation treat up and down movement equally, but a trader doesn't mind upward movement, it's the downside that causes stress and stomach ulcers that the index's name suggests.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:
  • Looking at the Downside risk index of 14 in the last 5 years of KLA, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (8.42 )
  • During the last 3 years, the Ulcer Index is 12 , which is larger, thus worse than the value of 3.51 from the benchmark.

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 -40.3 days of KLA is lower, thus worse.
  • Looking at maximum reduction from previous high 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 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 below previous high of 341 days in the last 5 years of KLA, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (488 days)
  • Looking at maximum days under water 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.'

Which means for our asset as example:
  • Looking at the average days below previous high of 85 days in the last 5 years of KLA, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (120 days)
  • Looking at average days under water in of 52 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, 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.