NortonLifeLock (NLOK)

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.'

• Looking at the total return of 51.2% in the last 5 years of NortonLifeLock, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (83.7%)
• During the last 3 years, the total return, or increase in value is 68.2%, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 74.4% from the benchmark.

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.'

• The compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) over 5 years of NortonLifeLock is 8.6%, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (13%) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the annual return (CAGR) is 18.9%, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 20.5% from the benchmark.

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 (17.2%) in the period of the last 5 years, the historical 30 days volatility of 36.8% of NortonLifeLock is greater, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the volatility is 33.3%, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 15.3% from the benchmark.

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 (11.8%) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside risk of 26.6% of NortonLifeLock is greater, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the downside deviation is 22.1%, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 10.3% from the benchmark.

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.'

• Looking at the risk / return profile (Sharpe) of 0.17 in the last 5 years of NortonLifeLock, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.61)
• Compared with SPY (1.18) in the period of the last 3 years, the Sharpe Ratio of 0.49 is lower, thus worse.

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.89) in the period of the last 5 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of 0.23 of NortonLifeLock is smaller, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (1.75) in the period of the last 3 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of 0.74 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.'

• Looking at the Ulcer Index of 18 in the last 5 years of NortonLifeLock, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (8.46 )
• During the last 3 years, the Ulcer Index is 14 , which is larger, thus worse than the value of 3.52 from the benchmark.

MaxDD:

'A maximum drawdown is the maximum loss from a peak to a trough of a portfolio, before a new peak is attained. Maximum Drawdown is an indicator of downside risk over a specified time period. It can be used both as a stand-alone measure or as an input into other metrics such as 'Return over Maximum Drawdown' and the Calmar Ratio. Maximum Drawdown is expressed in percentage terms.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (-24.5 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum reduction from previous high of -39.6 days of NortonLifeLock is smaller, thus worse.
• Looking at maximum reduction from previous high in of -33.5 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (-18.8 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 time in days below previous high water mark over 5 years of NortonLifeLock is 519 days, which is greater, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (488 days) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark is 190 days, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 87 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.'

• Looking at the average time in days below previous high water mark of 153 days in the last 5 years of NortonLifeLock, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (119 days)
• During the last 3 years, the average days under water is 72 days, which is higher, thus worse than the value of 20 days from the benchmark.