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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (107.1%) in the period of the last 5 years, the total return, or increase in value of 66.2% of Procter & Gamble is lower, thus worse.
• Looking at total return in of 33.5% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (38.2%).

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 compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) over 5 years of Procter & Gamble is 10.7%, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (15.7%) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the annual performance (CAGR) is 10.1%, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of 11.4% 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 (20.9%) in the period of the last 5 years, the 30 days standard deviation of 20.9% of Procter & Gamble is higher, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (17.5%) in the period of the last 3 years, the volatility of 17.6% is larger, thus worse.

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (14.9%) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside deviation of 14.6% of Procter & Gamble is smaller, thus better.
• Compared with SPY (12.2%) in the period of the last 3 years, the downside deviation of 12.5% is higher, thus worse.

Sharpe:

'The Sharpe ratio was developed by Nobel laureate William F. Sharpe, and is used to help investors understand the return of an investment compared to its risk. The ratio is the average return earned in excess of the risk-free rate per unit of volatility or total risk. Subtracting the risk-free rate from the mean return allows an investor to better isolate the profits associated with risk-taking activities. One intuition of this calculation is that a portfolio engaging in 'zero risk' investments, such as the purchase of U.S. Treasury bills (for which the expected return is the risk-free rate), has a Sharpe ratio of exactly zero. Generally, the greater the value of the Sharpe ratio, the more attractive the risk-adjusted return.'

• Looking at the risk / return profile (Sharpe) of 0.39 in the last 5 years of Procter & Gamble, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.63)
• Looking at Sharpe Ratio in of 0.43 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (0.51).

Sortino:

'The Sortino ratio measures the risk-adjusted return of an investment asset, portfolio, or strategy. It is a modification of the Sharpe ratio but penalizes only those returns falling below a user-specified target or required rate of return, while the Sharpe ratio penalizes both upside and downside volatility equally. Though both ratios measure an investment's risk-adjusted return, they do so in significantly different ways that will frequently lead to differing conclusions as to the true nature of the investment's return-generating efficiency. The Sortino ratio is used as a way to compare the risk-adjusted performance of programs with differing risk and return profiles. In general, risk-adjusted returns seek to normalize the risk across programs and then see which has the higher return unit per risk.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.88) in the period of the last 5 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of 0.56 of Procter & Gamble is lower, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation is 0.61, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 0.73 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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (9.32 ) in the period of the last 5 years, the Ulcer Index of 7.15 of Procter & Gamble is lower, thus better.
• During the last 3 years, the Ulcer Ratio is 7.92 , which is lower, thus better than the value of 10 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 (-33.7 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum DrawDown of -23.8 days of Procter & Gamble is higher, thus better.
• Compared with SPY (-24.5 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum drop from peak to valley of -23.8 days is greater, thus better.

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 days under water over 5 years of Procter & Gamble is 439 days, which is smaller, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (488 days) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (488 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum days below previous high of 439 days is lower, thus better.

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.'

• Looking at the average days under water of 107 days in the last 5 years of Procter & Gamble, we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (123 days)
• During the last 3 years, the average days below previous high is 143 days, which is smaller, thus better than the value of 178 days from the benchmark.