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.'

• The total return, or increase in value over 5 years of Procter & Gamble is 62.4%, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (107.9%) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (41%) in the period of the last 3 years, the total return, or performance of 21.3% is lower, thus worse.

CAGR:

'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.'

• Looking at the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 10.2% in the last 5 years of Procter & Gamble, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (15.8%)
• Looking at annual performance (CAGR) in of 6.7% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (12.2%).

Volatility:

'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.'

• The volatility over 5 years of Procter & Gamble is 20.7%, which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (20.6%) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (17.1%) in the period of the last 3 years, the volatility of 17.6% is larger, thus worse.

DownVol:

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

• The downside risk over 5 years of Procter & Gamble is 14.6%, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (14.7%) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the downside deviation is 12.8%, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 12% 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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.65) in the period of the last 5 years, the risk / return profile (Sharpe) of 0.37 of Procter & Gamble is lower, thus worse.
• Looking at Sharpe Ratio in of 0.24 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (0.57).

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.'

• The excess return divided by the downside deviation over 5 years of Procter & Gamble is 0.53, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.91) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the downside risk / excess return profile is 0.33, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 0.81 from the benchmark.

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 Ratio of 7.09 in the last 5 years of Procter & Gamble, we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (8.58 )
• Looking at Ulcer Index in of 8.01 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to SPY (8.58 ).

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 (-25.9 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum drop from peak to valley of -23.8 days of Procter & Gamble is greater, thus better.
• Compared with SPY (-22.1 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum drop from peak to valley of -23.8 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 Procter & Gamble is 439 days, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (488 days) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the maximum days under water is 439 days, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 325 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 days under water of 104 days in the last 5 years of Procter & Gamble, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (118 days)
• During the last 3 years, the average days below previous high is 142 days, which is higher, thus worse than the value of 89 days from the benchmark.