3M (MMM)

TotalReturn:

'Total return, when measuring performance, is the actual rate of return of an investment or a pool of investments over a given evaluation period. Total return includes interest, capital gains, dividends and distributions realized over a given period of time. Total return accounts for two categories of return: income including interest paid by fixed-income investments, distributions or dividends and capital appreciation, representing the change in the market price of an asset.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (67.6%) in the period of the last 5 years, the total return, or performance of 15.1% of 3M is lower, thus worse.
• Looking at total return, or performance in of -19.9% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (36.7%).

CAGR:

'The compound annual growth rate (CAGR) is a useful measure of growth over multiple time periods. It can be thought of as the growth rate that gets you from the initial investment value to the ending investment value if you assume that the investment has been compounding over the time period.'

• The compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) over 5 years of 3M is 2.8%, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (10.9%) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (11%) in the period of the last 3 years, the annual return (CAGR) of -7.1% 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.'

• The historical 30 days volatility over 5 years of 3M is 24.2%, which is greater, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (19%) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the 30 days standard deviation is 28.7%, which is higher, thus worse than the value of 22% 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.'

• Looking at the downside risk of 17.8% in the last 5 years of 3M, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (13.9%)
• Looking at downside volatility in of 21.4% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (16.2%).

Sharpe:

'The Sharpe ratio (also known as the Sharpe index, the Sharpe measure, and the reward-to-variability ratio) is a way to examine the performance of an investment by adjusting for its risk. The ratio measures the excess return (or risk premium) per unit of deviation in an investment asset or a trading strategy, typically referred to as risk, named after William F. Sharpe.'

• Looking at the risk / return profile (Sharpe) of 0.01 in the last 5 years of 3M, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.44)
• Looking at ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) in of -0.34 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to SPY (0.39).

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.'

• Looking at the downside risk / excess return profile of 0.02 in the last 5 years of 3M, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.6)
• Compared with SPY (0.53) in the period of the last 3 years, the excess return divided by the downside deviation of -0.45 is smaller, thus worse.

Ulcer:

'The ulcer index is a stock market risk measure or technical analysis indicator devised by Peter Martin in 1987, and published by him and Byron McCann in their 1989 book The Investors Guide to Fidelity Funds. It's designed as a measure of volatility, but only volatility in the downward direction, i.e. the amount of drawdown or retracement occurring over a period. Other volatility measures like standard deviation treat up and down movement equally, but a trader doesn't mind upward movement, it's the downside that causes stress and stomach ulcers that the index's name suggests.'

• Looking at the Ulcer Index of 19 in the last 5 years of 3M, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (5.91 )
• During the last 3 years, the Downside risk index is 25 , which is greater, thus worse than the value of 7 from the benchmark.

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.'

• Looking at the maximum DrawDown of -51.2 days in the last 5 years of 3M, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (-33.7 days)
• During the last 3 years, the maximum reduction from previous high is -51.2 days, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of -33.7 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). 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'

• The maximum time in days below previous high water mark over 5 years of 3M is 618 days, which is larger, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (187 days) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (139 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum days below previous high of 618 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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (45 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the average days below previous high of 177 days of 3M is higher, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (42 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the average days below previous high of 265 days is greater, thus worse.