Procter & Gamble (PG)

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.'

• Looking at the total return, or performance of 52.1% in the last 5 years of Procter & Gamble, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (106.2%)
• Compared with SPY (69.9%) in the period of the last 3 years, the total return of 29.2% is smaller, thus worse.

CAGR:

'Compound annual growth rate (CAGR) is a business and investing specific term for the geometric progression ratio that provides a constant rate of return over the time period. CAGR is not an accounting term, but it is often used to describe some element of the business, for example revenue, units delivered, registered users, etc. CAGR dampens the effect of volatility of periodic returns that can render arithmetic means irrelevant. It is particularly useful to compare growth rates from various data sets of common domain such as revenue growth of companies in the same industry.'

• The annual performance (CAGR) over 5 years of Procter & Gamble is 8.8%, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (15.6%) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (19.5%) in the period of the last 3 years, the annual performance (CAGR) of 9% is lower, thus worse.

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 (17.6%) in the period of the last 5 years, the volatility of 17.2% of Procter & Gamble is lower, thus better.
• Compared with SPY (17.7%) in the period of the last 3 years, the volatility of 17.3% is smaller, thus better.

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 (12.2%) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside deviation of 12.4% of Procter & Gamble is higher, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the downside deviation is 12.4%, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 11.6% 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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.74) in the period of the last 5 years, the ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) of 0.37 of Procter & Gamble is smaller, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the Sharpe Ratio is 0.37, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 0.96 from the benchmark.

Sortino:

'The Sortino ratio, a variation of the Sharpe ratio only factors in the downside, or negative volatility, rather than the total volatility used in calculating the Sharpe ratio. The theory behind the Sortino variation is that upside volatility is a plus for the investment, and it, therefore, should not be included in the risk calculation. Therefore, the Sortino ratio takes upside volatility out of the equation and uses only the downside standard deviation in its calculation instead of the total standard deviation that is used in calculating the Sharpe ratio.'

• Looking at the excess return divided by the downside deviation of 0.51 in the last 5 years of Procter & Gamble, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (1.08)
• During the last 3 years, the downside risk / excess return profile is 0.52, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 1.46 from the benchmark.

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (8.48 ) in the period of the last 5 years, the Ulcer Ratio of 7.08 of Procter & Gamble is smaller, thus better.
• Looking at Downside risk index in of 5.54 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (5.32 ).

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.'

• The maximum reduction from previous high over 5 years of Procter & Gamble is -23.8 days, which is higher, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (-24.5 days) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the maximum drop from peak to valley is -17.5 days, which is greater, thus better than the value of -18.8 days from the benchmark.

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (488 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum days below previous high of 439 days of Procter & Gamble is lower, thus better.
• During the last 3 years, the maximum days below previous high is 134 days, which is lower, thus better than the value of 199 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.'

• The average time in days below previous high water mark over 5 years of Procter & Gamble is 109 days, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (120 days) in the same period.
• Looking at average days below previous high in of 38 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to SPY (46 days).