Description

Monster Beverage Corporation, through its subsidiaries, develops, markets, sells, and distributes energy drink beverages and concentrates in the United States and internationally. It operates through three segments: Monster Energy Drinks, Strategic Brands, and Other. The company offers carbonated energy drinks, non-carbonated dairy based coffee and energy drinks, non-carbonated energy shakes, non-carbonated energy teas, non-carbonated energy drinks, and ready-to-drink packaged energy drinks primarily to bottlers and beverage distributors, as well as sells directly to retail grocery and specialty chains, wholesalers, club stores, drug stores, mass merchandisers, convenience chains, food service customers, and the military; and concentrates and/or beverage bases to bottling and canning operations. Monster Beverage Corporation sells its products under the Monster Energy, Monster Energy Ultra, Monster Rehab, Monster MAXX, Java Monster, Muscle Monster, Espresso Monster, Punch Monster, Juice Monster, Monster Hydro, Caffé Monster, Reign Total Body Fuel, Reign Inferno Thermogenic Fuel, Predator, Live+, NOS, Full Throttle, Burn, Mother, Nalu, Ultra Energy, Play and Power Play, Relentless, BPM, BU, Gladiator, Samurai, and Mutant brands. The company was formerly known as Hansen Natural Corporation and changed its name to Monster Beverage Corporation in January 2012. Monster Beverage Corporation was incorporated in 1990 and is headquartered in Corona, California.

Statistics (YTD)

What do these metrics mean? [Read More] [Hide]

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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:
  • Compared with the benchmark SPY (75.6%) in the period of the last 5 years, the total return, or performance of 87.3% of Monster Beverage is greater, thus better.
  • Compared with SPY (40%) in the period of the last 3 years, the total return, or performance of 48.2% is larger, thus better.

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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:
  • The compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) over 5 years of Monster Beverage is 13.4%, which is larger, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (11.9%) in the same period.
  • Looking at compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) in of 14% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus better in comparison to SPY (11.9%).

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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:
  • Looking at the volatility of 28.3% in the last 5 years of Monster Beverage, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (20.3%)
  • Compared with SPY (23.6%) in the period of the last 3 years, the 30 days standard deviation of 29% is larger, thus worse.

DownVol:

'The downside volatility is similar to the volatility, or standard deviation, but only takes losing/negative periods into account.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:
  • The downside deviation over 5 years of Monster Beverage is 19.9%, which is larger, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (14.9%) in the same period.
  • During the last 3 years, the downside deviation is 19.9%, which is higher, thus worse than the value of 17.3% from the benchmark.

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.'

Which means for our asset as example:
  • Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.46) in the period of the last 5 years, the ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) of 0.38 of Monster Beverage is smaller, thus worse.
  • Compared with SPY (0.4) in the period of the last 3 years, the risk / return profile (Sharpe) of 0.4 is higher, thus better.

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.'

Which means for our asset as example:
  • Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.63) in the period of the last 5 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of 0.55 of Monster Beverage is lower, thus worse.
  • Compared with SPY (0.54) in the period of the last 3 years, the downside risk / excess return profile of 0.58 is larger, thus better.

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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:
  • Looking at the Ulcer Ratio of 12 in the last 5 years of Monster Beverage, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (6.62 )
  • During the last 3 years, the Downside risk index is 9.63 , which is greater, thus worse than the value of 7.55 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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:
  • Compared with the benchmark SPY (-33.7 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum reduction from previous high of -30.4 days of Monster Beverage is greater, thus better.
  • Compared with SPY (-33.7 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum DrawDown of -27.6 days is greater, thus better.

MaxDuration:

'The Maximum 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. It is the length of time the account was in the Max Drawdown. A Max Drawdown measures a retrenchment from when an equity curve reaches a new high. It’s the maximum an account lost during that retrenchment. This method is applied because a valley can’t be measured until a new high occurs. Once the new high is reached, the percentage change from the old high to the bottom of the largest trough is recorded.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:
  • Looking at the maximum time in days below previous high water mark of 508 days in the last 5 years of Monster Beverage, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (139 days)
  • Looking at maximum time in days below previous high water mark in of 221 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (120 days).

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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:
  • The average days under water over 5 years of Monster Beverage is 140 days, which is larger, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (37 days) in the same period.
  • Compared with SPY (31 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the average days below previous high of 61 days is greater, thus worse.

Performance (YTD)

Historical returns have been extended using synthetic data.

Allocations ()

Allocations

Returns (%)

  • Note that yearly returns do not equal 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.