lululemon (LULU)

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.'

• Looking at the total return, or performance of -47.7% in the last 5 years of lululemon, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (76.9%)
• During the last 3 years, the total return, or increase in value is -54.3%, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of 72.7% from the benchmark.

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.'

• The compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) over 5 years of lululemon is -12.2%, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (12.1%) in the same period.
• Looking at annual return (CAGR) in of -23.1% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to SPY (20.1%).

Volatility:

'Volatility is a rate at which the price of a security increases or decreases for a given set of returns. Volatility is measured by calculating the standard deviation of the annualized returns over a given period of time. It shows the range to which the price of a security may increase or decrease. Volatility measures the risk of a security. It is used in option pricing formula to gauge the fluctuations in the returns of the underlying assets. Volatility indicates the pricing behavior of the security and helps estimate the fluctuations that may happen in a short period of time.'

• The 30 days standard deviation over 5 years of lululemon is 41.5%, which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (17.1%) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the volatility is 41.2%, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 15.2% from the benchmark.

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (11.8%) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside risk of 30.4% of lululemon is larger, thus worse.
• Looking at downside deviation in of 31.3% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to SPY (10.1%).

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.'

• The ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) over 5 years of lululemon is -0.35, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.56) in the same period.
• Looking at ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) in of -0.62 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (1.16).

Sortino:

'The Sortino ratio improves upon the Sharpe ratio by isolating downside volatility from total volatility by dividing excess return by the downside deviation. The Sortino ratio is a variation of the Sharpe ratio that differentiates harmful volatility from total overall volatility by using the asset's standard deviation of negative asset returns, called downside deviation. The Sortino ratio takes the asset's return and subtracts the risk-free rate, and then divides that amount by the asset's downside deviation. The ratio was named after Frank A. Sortino.'

• The ratio of annual return and downside deviation over 5 years of lululemon is -0.48, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.82) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the excess return divided by the downside deviation is -0.82, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of 1.73 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 Downside risk index of 37 in the last 5 years of lululemon, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (8.45 )
• Compared with SPY (3.5 ) in the period of the last 3 years, the Ulcer Ratio of 42 is larger, thus worse.

MaxDD:

'Maximum drawdown is defined as the peak-to-trough decline of an investment during a specific period. It is usually quoted as a percentage of the peak value. The maximum drawdown can be calculated based on absolute returns, in order to identify strategies that suffer less during market downturns, such as low-volatility strategies. However, the maximum drawdown can also be calculated based on returns relative to a benchmark index, for identifying strategies that show steady outperformance over time.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (-24.5 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum drop from peak to valley of -71.5 days of lululemon is lower, thus worse.
• Looking at maximum reduction from previous high in of -71.5 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) in days.'

• Looking at the maximum time in days below previous high water mark of 569 days in the last 5 years of lululemon, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (488 days)
• Looking at maximum days below previous high in of 569 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, 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 under water over 5 years of lululemon is 246 days, which is greater, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (119 days) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (20 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the average days under water of 226 days is higher, thus worse.