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 29.1%, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (86.2%) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the total return, or performance is 132.3%, which is larger, thus better than the value of 83.8% 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.'

• Looking at the annual performance (CAGR) of 5.3% in the last 5 years of 3M, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (13.3%)
• Looking at annual performance (CAGR) in of 32.7% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus better in comparison to SPY (22.7%).

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 (17.2%) in the period of the last 5 years, the volatility of 28.6% of 3M is higher, thus worse.
• Looking at historical 30 days volatility in of 30.1% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (15.4%).

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.'

• Looking at the downside risk of 18.5% in the last 5 years of 3M, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (11.8%)
• During the last 3 years, the downside volatility is 18%, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 10.3% from the benchmark.

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.63) in the period of the last 5 years, the ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) of 0.1 of 3M is lower, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the Sharpe Ratio is 1, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of 1.31 from the benchmark.

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.'

• Looking at the excess return divided by the downside deviation of 0.15 in the last 5 years of 3M, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.91)
• During the last 3 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation is 1.68, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 1.96 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 27 in the last 5 years of 3M, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (8.46 )
• Looking at Downside risk index in of 7.92 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (3.37 ).

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 DrawDown of -52.6 days of 3M is lower, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (-18.8 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum reduction from previous high of -20.7 days is lower, thus worse.

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). Many assume Max DD Duration is the length of time between new highs during which the Max DD (magnitude) occurred. But that isn’t always the case. The Max DD duration is the longest time between peaks, period. So it could be the time when the program also had its biggest peak to valley loss (and usually is, because the program needs a long time to recover from the largest loss), but it doesn’t have to be'

• Looking at the maximum days under water of 859 days in the last 5 years of 3M, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (488 days)
• Compared with SPY (87 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum days below previous high of 111 days is larger, 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 time in days below previous high water mark of 311 days in the last 5 years of 3M, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (119 days)
• Compared with SPY (18 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the average days below previous high of 30 days is larger, thus worse.