Monster Beverage (MNST)

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (113.2%) in the period of the last 5 years, the total return, or increase in value of 62% of Monster Beverage is smaller, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (68%) in the period of the last 3 years, the total return of 26.6% is smaller, thus worse.

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 (16.4%) in the period of the last 5 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 10.2% of Monster Beverage is lower, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) is 8.2%, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of 19% 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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (17.5%) in the period of the last 5 years, the historical 30 days volatility of 23.9% of Monster Beverage is higher, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the volatility is 22.8%, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 17.3% 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 (12.1%) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside risk of 16.6% of Monster Beverage is larger, thus worse.
• Looking at downside deviation in of 16.1% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (11.5%).

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 Monster Beverage is 0.32, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.79) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) is 0.25, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 0.95 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 (1.15) in the period of the last 5 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of 0.46 of Monster Beverage is lower, thus worse.
• Looking at excess return divided by the downside deviation in of 0.36 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (1.43).

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.'

• Looking at the Ulcer Ratio of 9.86 in the last 5 years of Monster Beverage, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (8.48 )
• Looking at Ulcer Index in of 10 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (5.3 ).

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 DrawDown of -26.6 days of Monster Beverage is lower, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the maximum reduction from previous high is -26 days, which is lower, thus worse than the value of -18.8 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) in days.'

• Looking at the maximum days under water of 285 days in the last 5 years of Monster Beverage, we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (488 days)
• During the last 3 years, the maximum days below previous high is 285 days, which is greater, 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 Monster Beverage is 87 days, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (120 days) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the average time in days below previous high water mark is 94 days, which is higher, thus worse than the value of 47 days from the benchmark.