'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- The total return, or performance over 5 years of Monster Beverage is 170.6%, which is higher, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (67.9%) in the same period.
- During the last 3 years, the total return, or increase in value is 26.7%, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 46.6% from the benchmark.

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- Looking at the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 22% in the last 5 years of Monster Beverage, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (10.9%)
- Compared with SPY (13.6%) in the period of the last 3 years, the annual performance (CAGR) of 8.2% is smaller, thus worse.

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Looking at the volatility of 31.5% in the last 5 years of Monster Beverage, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (13.3%)
- Looking at historical 30 days volatility in of 26.1% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (12.5%).

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- The downside risk over 5 years of Monster Beverage is 28%, which is greater, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (14.6%) in the same period.
- Looking at downside deviation in of 27% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (14.2%).

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- The ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) over 5 years of Monster Beverage is 0.62, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.64) in the same period.
- During the last 3 years, the risk / return profile (Sharpe) is 0.22, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of 0.89 from the benchmark.

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- The ratio of annual return and downside deviation over 5 years of Monster Beverage is 0.7, which is larger, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (0.58) in the same period.
- Compared with SPY (0.78) in the period of the last 3 years, the downside risk / excess return profile of 0.21 is lower, thus worse.

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Looking at the Ulcer Index of 12 in the last 5 years of Monster Beverage, we see it is relatively larger, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (3.96 )
- Looking at Ulcer Ratio in of 14 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus better in comparison to SPY (4.01 ).

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (-19.3 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum DrawDown of -30.4 days of Monster Beverage is lower, thus worse.
- Compared with SPY (-19.3 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum reduction from previous high of -30.4 days is lower, thus worse.

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (187 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark of 328 days of Monster Beverage is higher, thus worse.
- During the last 3 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark is 328 days, which is higher, thus worse than the value of 139 days from the benchmark.

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (41 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the average days below previous high of 89 days of Monster Beverage is larger, thus worse.
- During the last 3 years, the average time in days below previous high water mark is 124 days, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 36 days from the benchmark.

Historical returns have been extended using synthetic data.
[Show Details]

- "Year" returns in the table above are not equal to the sum of monthly returns due to compounding.
- Performance results of Monster Beverage are hypothetical, do not account for slippage, fees or taxes, and are based on backtesting, which has many inherent limitations, some of which are described in our Terms of Use.