NetEase (NTES)

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.'

• The total return over 5 years of NetEase is 22.6%, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (81%) in the same period.
• Looking at total return, or performance in of 50.9% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (75.7%).

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 (12.7%) in the period of the last 5 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 4.2% of NetEase is lower, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the annual performance (CAGR) is 14.8%, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of 20.8% from the benchmark.

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (17%) in the period of the last 5 years, the volatility of 43.9% of NetEase is greater, thus worse.
• Looking at historical 30 days volatility in of 37.6% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to SPY (15%).

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.'

• Looking at the downside volatility of 29.1% in the last 5 years of NetEase, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (11.7%)
• Looking at downside risk in of 25.3% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (10.1%).

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.'

• The ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) over 5 years of NetEase is 0.04, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.6) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (1.22) in the period of the last 3 years, the Sharpe Ratio of 0.33 is smaller, 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 (0.87) in the period of the last 5 years, the excess return divided by the downside deviation of 0.06 of NetEase is lower, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the excess return divided by the downside deviation is 0.49, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of 1.82 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.'

• Looking at the Ulcer Index of 20 in the last 5 years of NetEase, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (8.42 )
• During the last 3 years, the Ulcer Ratio is 15 , which is greater, thus worse than the value of 3.4 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.'

• Looking at the maximum DrawDown of -52.6 days in the last 5 years of NetEase, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (-24.5 days)
• Compared with SPY (-18.8 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum DrawDown of -34 days is lower, thus worse.

MaxDuration:

'The Maximum 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. It is the length of time the account was in the Max Drawdown. A Max Drawdown measures a retrenchment from when an equity curve reaches a new high. It’s the maximum an account lost during that retrenchment. This method is applied because a valley can’t be measured until a new high occurs. Once the new high is reached, the percentage change from the old high to the bottom of the largest trough is recorded.'

• The maximum days under water over 5 years of NetEase is 624 days, which is greater, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (488 days) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the maximum days under water is 370 days, which is larger, 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.'

• The average days under water over 5 years of NetEase is 223 days, which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (119 days) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the average time in days below previous high water mark is 113 days, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 19 days from the benchmark.