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.'

Which means for our asset as example:
  • The total return, or performance over 5 years of Monster Beverage is 122.3%, which is higher, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (67.8%) in the same period.
  • Looking at total return, or increase in value in of 60.6% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to SPY (44.5%).

CAGR:

'The compound annual growth rate isn't a true return rate, but rather a representational figure. It is essentially a number that describes the rate at which an investment would have grown if it had grown the same rate every year and the profits were reinvested at the end of each year. In reality, this sort of performance is unlikely. However, CAGR can be used to smooth returns so that they may be more easily understood when compared to alternative investments.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:
  • Looking at the annual performance (CAGR) of 17.4% 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 (13.1%) in the period of the last 3 years, the annual performance (CAGR) of 17.1% is higher, thus better.

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.'

Which means for our asset as example:
  • Compared with the benchmark SPY (21.4%) in the period of the last 5 years, the volatility of 27.7% of Monster Beverage is higher, thus worse.
  • Looking at 30 days standard deviation in of 24.5% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (18.8%).

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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:
  • Looking at the downside volatility of 18.7% in the last 5 years of Monster Beverage, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (15.4%)
  • Looking at downside risk in of 16.5% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (13.3%).

Sharpe:

'The Sharpe ratio is the measure of risk-adjusted return of a financial portfolio. Sharpe ratio is a measure of excess portfolio return over the risk-free rate relative to its standard deviation. Normally, the 90-day Treasury bill rate is taken as the proxy for risk-free rate. A portfolio with a higher Sharpe ratio is considered superior relative to its peers. The measure was named after William F Sharpe, a Nobel laureate and professor of finance, emeritus at Stanford University.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:
  • Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.39) in the period of the last 5 years, the Sharpe Ratio of 0.54 of Monster Beverage is higher, thus better.
  • Compared with SPY (0.56) in the period of the last 3 years, the risk / return profile (Sharpe) of 0.6 is greater, 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:
  • Looking at the downside risk / excess return profile of 0.79 in the last 5 years of Monster Beverage, we see it is relatively larger, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.55)
  • During the last 3 years, the downside risk / excess return profile is 0.89, which is higher, thus better than the value of 0.79 from the benchmark.

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:
  • The Ulcer Ratio over 5 years of Monster Beverage is 9.05 , which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (9.46 ) in the same period.
  • During the last 3 years, the Ulcer Index is 8.07 , which is lower, thus better than the value of 10 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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:
  • Looking at the maximum drop from peak to valley of -27.6 days in the last 5 years of Monster Beverage, we see it is relatively larger, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (-33.7 days)
  • During the last 3 years, the maximum DrawDown is -26.6 days, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of -24.5 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.'

Which means for our asset as example:
  • The maximum days under water over 5 years of Monster Beverage is 242 days, which is smaller, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (352 days) in the same period.
  • During the last 3 years, the maximum days below previous high is 242 days, which is lower, thus better than the value of 352 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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:
  • The average time in days below previous high water mark over 5 years of Monster Beverage is 55 days, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (78 days) in the same period.
  • Compared with SPY (102 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the average time in days below previous high water mark of 59 days is lower, thus better.

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.