Merck (MRK)

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 (75.6%) in the period of the last 5 years, the total return, or increase in value of 76.7% of Merck is larger, thus better.
• During the last 3 years, the total return is 30.2%, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of 40% 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.'

• The compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) over 5 years of Merck is 12.1%, which is higher, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (11.9%) in the same period.
• Looking at compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) in of 9.2% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (11.9%).

Volatility:

'Volatility is a statistical measure of the dispersion of returns for a given security or market index. Volatility can either be measured by using the standard deviation or variance between returns from that same security or market index. Commonly, the higher the volatility, the riskier the security. In the securities markets, volatility is often associated with big swings in either direction. For example, when the stock market rises and falls more than one percent over a sustained period of time, it is called a 'volatile' market.'

• The historical 30 days volatility over 5 years of Merck is 23%, which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (20.3%) in the same period.
• Looking at historical 30 days volatility in of 25.5% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (23.6%).

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 (14.9%) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside volatility of 16% of Merck is larger, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (17.3%) in the period of the last 3 years, the downside volatility of 17.8% is higher, 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 Sharpe Ratio over 5 years of Merck is 0.42, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.46) in the same period.
• Looking at risk / return profile (Sharpe) in of 0.26 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (0.4).

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 (0.63) in the period of the last 5 years, the excess return divided by the downside deviation of 0.6 of Merck is lower, thus worse.
• Looking at excess return divided by the downside deviation in of 0.38 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to SPY (0.54).

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.'

• Looking at the Downside risk index of 9.53 in the last 5 years of Merck, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (6.62 )
• Looking at Ulcer Index in of 10 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (7.55 ).

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (-33.7 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum reduction from previous high of -27.3 days of Merck is greater, thus better.
• Looking at maximum DrawDown in of -27.3 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus better in comparison to SPY (-33.7 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). Many assume Max DD Duration is the length of time between new highs during which the Max DD (magnitude) occurred. But that isn’t always the case. The Max DD duration is the longest time between peaks, period. So it could be the time when the program also had its biggest peak to valley loss (and usually is, because the program needs a long time to recover from the largest loss), but it doesn’t have to be'

• The maximum days under water over 5 years of Merck is 441 days, which is larger, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (139 days) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the maximum days under water is 441 days, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 120 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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (37 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the average days under water of 115 days of Merck is higher, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the average days below previous high is 150 days, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 31 days from the benchmark.