lululemon (LULU)

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (100.9%) in the period of the last 5 years, the total return, or performance of -47.5% of lululemon is smaller, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (78%) in the period of the last 3 years, the total return, or increase in value of -44.5% is lower, thus worse.

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.'

• Looking at the annual return (CAGR) of -12.1% in the last 5 years of lululemon, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (15%)
• Compared with SPY (21.3%) in the period of the last 3 years, the annual performance (CAGR) of -17.9% is lower, thus worse.

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (17%) in the period of the last 5 years, the volatility of 41.2% of lululemon is larger, thus worse.
• Looking at historical 30 days volatility in of 41% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, 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.'

• The downside volatility over 5 years of lululemon is 30.3%, which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (11.7%) in the same period.
• Looking at downside volatility in of 30.7% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (10.2%).

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 -0.35 in the last 5 years of lululemon, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.74)
• Looking at Sharpe Ratio in of -0.5 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (1.23).

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 (1.07) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (1.84) in the period of the last 3 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of -0.66 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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (8.42 ) in the period of the last 5 years, the Ulcer Index of 35 of lululemon is larger, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the Ulcer Index is 38 , which is greater, 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.'

• Looking at the maximum reduction from previous high of -68.7 days in the last 5 years of lululemon, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (-24.5 days)
• During the last 3 years, the maximum drop from peak to valley is -68.7 days, which is lower, 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.'

• The maximum time in days below previous high water mark over 5 years of lululemon is 521 days, which is greater, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (488 days) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the maximum days below previous high is 521 days, which is greater, 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 (120 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the average time in days below previous high water mark of 226 days of lululemon is larger, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (21 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the average days under water of 192 days is larger, thus worse.