Nike (NKE)

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (98.3%) in the period of the last 5 years, the total return, or performance of -23.6% of Nike is lower, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (45.5%) in the period of the last 3 years, the total return, or increase in value of -45.9% is smaller, thus worse.

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (14.7%) in the period of the last 5 years, the annual return (CAGR) of -5.3% of Nike is lower, thus worse.
• Looking at annual performance (CAGR) in of -18.6% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (13.4%).

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 (21%) in the period of the last 5 years, the volatility of 34.8% of Nike is larger, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the historical 30 days volatility is 34.2%, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 17.4% from the benchmark.

DownVol:

'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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (15%) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside deviation of 25% of Nike is higher, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the downside risk is 26%, which is higher, thus worse than the value of 12.1% from the benchmark.

Sharpe:

'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.'

• The risk / return profile (Sharpe) over 5 years of Nike is -0.22, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.58) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (0.62) in the period of the last 3 years, the ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) of -0.62 is lower, thus worse.

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.'

• The downside risk / excess return profile over 5 years of Nike is -0.31, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.81) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (0.89) in the period of the last 3 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of -0.81 is lower, thus worse.

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.'

• The Ulcer Index over 5 years of Nike is 33 , which is greater, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (9.33 ) in the same period.
• Looking at Downside risk index in of 31 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (8.63 ).

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 (-33.7 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum drop from peak to valley of -58.6 days of Nike is smaller, thus worse.
• Looking at maximum DrawDown in of -50.7 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to SPY (-22.1 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) in days.'

• Looking at the maximum days under water of 805 days in the last 5 years of Nike, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (488 days)
• Compared with SPY (325 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark of 745 days is larger, thus worse.

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 (122 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the average days below previous high of 280 days of Nike is higher, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the average days under water is 371 days, which is higher, thus worse than the value of 89 days from the benchmark.