'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Looking at the total return, or performance of 225.2% in the last 5 years of NetApp, we see it is relatively greater, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (121.2%)
- Compared with SPY (67.5%) in the period of the last 3 years, the total return, or increase in value of 27.9% is lower, thus worse.

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Looking at the annual performance (CAGR) of 26.6% in the last 5 years of NetApp, we see it is relatively larger, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (17.2%)
- Looking at compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) in of 8.5% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (18.7%).

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- The volatility over 5 years of NetApp is 37.9%, which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (18.7%) in the same period.
- Looking at historical 30 days volatility in of 42.4% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to SPY (22.5%).

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

Which means for our asset as example:- Looking at the downside volatility of 26.6% in the last 5 years of NetApp, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (13.6%)
- During the last 3 years, the downside volatility is 31.4%, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 16.3% from the benchmark.

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.79) in the period of the last 5 years, the Sharpe Ratio of 0.64 of NetApp is lower, thus worse.
- Compared with SPY (0.72) in the period of the last 3 years, the risk / return profile (Sharpe) of 0.14 is smaller, thus worse.

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Looking at the downside risk / excess return profile of 0.91 in the last 5 years of NetApp, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (1.08)
- Looking at ratio of annual return and downside deviation in of 0.19 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (1).

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (5.59 ) in the period of the last 5 years, the Ulcer Ratio of 25 of NetApp is greater, thus worse.
- During the last 3 years, the Ulcer Index is 32 , which is larger, thus worse than the value of 6.83 from the benchmark.

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Looking at the maximum DrawDown of -58.1 days in the last 5 years of NetApp, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (-33.7 days)
- Looking at maximum DrawDown in of -58.1 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (-33.7 days).

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (139 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark of 653 days of NetApp is greater, thus worse.
- Looking at maximum time in days below previous high water mark in of 653 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to SPY (139 days).

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (33 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the average days under water of 195 days of NetApp is greater, thus worse.
- Looking at average days under water in of 295 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (35 days).

Historical returns have been extended using synthetic data.
[Show Details]

- Note that yearly returns do not equal the sum of monthly returns due to compounding.
- Performance results of NetApp 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.