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.'

• The total return, or increase in value over 5 years of 3M is 38.7%, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (109.8%) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the total return is 26.2%, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of 42.5% from the benchmark.

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (16%) in the period of the last 5 years, the annual return (CAGR) of 6.8% of 3M is smaller, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) is 8.1%, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 12.6% from the benchmark.

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 3M is 28%, which is greater, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (17.9%) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the volatility is 31.1%, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 18.4% from the benchmark.

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (12.5%) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside risk of 18.4% of 3M is larger, thus worse.
• Looking at downside volatility in of 19.6% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to SPY (12.6%).

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 risk / return profile (Sharpe) of 0.15 in the last 5 years of 3M, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.75)
• Compared with SPY (0.55) in the period of the last 3 years, the risk / return profile (Sharpe) of 0.18 is smaller, thus worse.

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (1.08) in the period of the last 5 years, the excess return divided by the downside deviation of 0.23 of 3M is smaller, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (0.8) in the period of the last 3 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of 0.29 is smaller, 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 (8.48 ) in the period of the last 5 years, the Ulcer Index of 29 of 3M is higher, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the Ulcer Ratio is 21 , which is greater, thus worse than the value of 5.54 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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (-24.5 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum reduction from previous high of -54.1 days of 3M is smaller, thus worse.
• Looking at maximum drop from peak to valley in of -40 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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (488 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum days under water of 911 days of 3M is larger, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the maximum days under water is 489 days, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 199 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.'

• Looking at the average days under water of 346 days in the last 5 years of 3M, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (119 days)
• During the last 3 years, the average days under water is 173 days, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 44 days from the benchmark.