Lucid Group (LCID)

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.'

• The total return over 5 years of Lucid Group is %, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (57.1%) in the same period.
• Looking at total return, or performance in of -44.8% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to SPY (32%).

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.'

• Looking at the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of % in the last 5 years of Lucid Group, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (9.5%)
• Compared with SPY (9.7%) in the period of the last 3 years, the annual performance (CAGR) of -18% is lower, thus worse.

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (21.5%) in the period of the last 5 years, the volatility of % of Lucid Group is smaller, thus better.
• Compared with SPY (17.9%) in the period of the last 3 years, the historical 30 days volatility of 94.8% is greater, thus worse.

DownVol:

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

• Looking at the downside deviation of % in the last 5 years of Lucid Group, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (15.5%)
• Looking at downside risk in of 59.1% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (12.5%).

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 Sharpe Ratio of in the last 5 years of Lucid Group, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.32)
• Compared with SPY (0.41) in the period of the last 3 years, the risk / return profile (Sharpe) of -0.22 is smaller, thus worse.

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 downside risk / excess return profile over 5 years of Lucid Group is , which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.45) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation is -0.35, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of 0.58 from the benchmark.

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 Ratio of in the last 5 years of Lucid Group, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (9.57 )
• During the last 3 years, the Downside risk index is 66 , which is greater, thus worse than the value of 10 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.'

• The maximum DrawDown over 5 years of Lucid Group is days, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (-33.7 days) in the same period.
• Looking at maximum reduction from previous high in of -91.2 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to SPY (-24.5 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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (439 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark of days of Lucid Group is smaller, thus better.
• Looking at maximum days below previous high in of 660 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (439 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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (106 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the average days under water of days of Lucid Group is lower, thus better.
• During the last 3 years, the average days under water is 300 days, which is higher, thus worse than the value of 149 days from the benchmark.