3M (MMM)

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.'

• Looking at the total return, or performance of 44.3% in the last 5 years of 3M, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (109.7%)
• During the last 3 years, the total return, or performance is 65.5%, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 70.1% from the benchmark.

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (16%) in the period of the last 5 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 7.6% of 3M is smaller, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (19.5%) in the period of the last 3 years, the annual return (CAGR) of 18.4% 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 27.5%, which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (17.5%) in the same period.
• Looking at 30 days standard deviation in of 31.1% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (17.4%).

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.'

• Looking at the downside volatility of 17.9% in the last 5 years of 3M, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (12.1%)
• Compared with SPY (11.5%) in the period of the last 3 years, the downside risk of 19.3% is larger, 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 ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) over 5 years of 3M is 0.19, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.77) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the risk / return profile (Sharpe) is 0.51, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 0.97 from the benchmark.

Sortino:

'The Sortino ratio measures the risk-adjusted return of an investment asset, portfolio, or strategy. It is a modification of the Sharpe ratio but penalizes only those returns falling below a user-specified target or required rate of return, while the Sharpe ratio penalizes both upside and downside volatility equally. Though both ratios measure an investment's risk-adjusted return, they do so in significantly different ways that will frequently lead to differing conclusions as to the true nature of the investment's return-generating efficiency. The Sortino ratio is used as a way to compare the risk-adjusted performance of programs with differing risk and return profiles. In general, risk-adjusted returns seek to normalize the risk across programs and then see which has the higher return unit per risk.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (1.12) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside risk / excess return profile of 0.29 of 3M is lower, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the downside risk / excess return profile is 0.82, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 1.47 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.'

• The Ulcer Index over 5 years of 3M is 29 , which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (8.48 ) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the Ulcer Index is 21 , which is larger, thus worse than the value of 5.3 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 reduction from previous high of -54.1 days in the last 5 years of 3M, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (-24.5 days)
• Looking at maximum reduction from previous high in of -40 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, 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.'

• Looking at the maximum days below previous high of 911 days in the last 5 years of 3M, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (488 days)
• During the last 3 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark is 489 days, which is higher, thus worse than the value of 199 days from the benchmark.

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.'

• The average days under water over 5 years of 3M is 348 days, which is larger, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (120 days) in the same period.
• Looking at average days below previous high in of 178 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (47 days).