3M (MMM)

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.'

• The total return, or increase in value over 5 years of 3M is 41.3%, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (115.1%) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (71.1%) in the period of the last 3 years, the total return, or performance of 61.2% is smaller, thus worse.

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.'

• The annual performance (CAGR) over 5 years of 3M is 7.2%, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (16.6%) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (19.7%) in the period of the last 3 years, the annual return (CAGR) of 17.3% 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 (17.5%) in the period of the last 5 years, the historical 30 days volatility of 27.6% of 3M is larger, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (17.5%) in the period of the last 3 years, the volatility of 31.1% is greater, thus worse.

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 (12.1%) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside risk of 18% of 3M is higher, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (11.5%) in the period of the last 3 years, the downside volatility of 19.3% is greater, thus worse.

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 Sharpe Ratio over 5 years of 3M is 0.17, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.8) in the same period.
• Looking at ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) in of 0.48 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (0.98).

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 3M is 0.26, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (1.17) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (1.49) in the period of the last 3 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of 0.77 is lower, thus worse.

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.'

• The Ulcer Index over 5 years of 3M is 29 , which is greater, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (8.48 ) in the same period.
• Looking at Downside risk index in of 21 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (5.31 ).

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 -54.1 days of 3M is smaller, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the maximum DrawDown is -40 days, which is lower, thus worse than the value of -18.8 days from the benchmark.

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.'

• Looking at the maximum days below previous high of 911 days in the last 5 years of 3M, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (488 days)
• Compared with SPY (199 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum days under water of 489 days is greater, thus worse.

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.'

• Looking at the average days below previous high of 347 days in the last 5 years of 3M, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (120 days)
• Compared with SPY (47 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the average days under water of 178 days is higher, thus worse.