Procter & Gamble (PG)

TotalReturn:

'Total return, when measuring performance, is the actual rate of return of an investment or a pool of investments over a given evaluation period. Total return includes interest, capital gains, dividends and distributions realized over a given period of time. Total return accounts for two categories of return: income including interest paid by fixed-income investments, distributions or dividends and capital appreciation, representing the change in the market price of an asset.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (91.7%) in the period of the last 5 years, the total return of 112.1% of Procter & Gamble is greater, thus better.
• Compared with SPY (47.9%) in the period of the last 3 years, the total return of 70.9% is greater, thus better.

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.'

• Looking at the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 16.2% in the last 5 years of Procter & Gamble, we see it is relatively greater, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (13.9%)
• Looking at compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) in of 19.5% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus better in comparison to SPY (13.9%).

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 (19%) in the period of the last 5 years, the historical 30 days volatility of 20.2% of Procter & Gamble is higher, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (22.8%) in the period of the last 3 years, the 30 days standard deviation of 23.8% is higher, 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.'

• Looking at the downside risk of 13.6% in the last 5 years of Procter & Gamble, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (13.8%)
• During the last 3 years, the downside deviation is 16%, which is smaller, thus better than the value of 16.7% 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.'

• Looking at the Sharpe Ratio of 0.68 in the last 5 years of Procter & Gamble, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.6)
• Looking at ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) in of 0.72 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus better in comparison to SPY (0.5).

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 (0.82) in the period of the last 5 years, the excess return divided by the downside deviation of 1.01 of Procter & Gamble is higher, thus better.
• Compared with SPY (0.68) in the period of the last 3 years, the excess return divided by the downside deviation of 1.06 is greater, thus better.

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 (5.82 ) in the period of the last 5 years, the Ulcer Index of 6.63 of Procter & Gamble is larger, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the Ulcer Index is 7.69 , which is higher, thus worse than the value of 7.14 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 reduction from previous high of -23.2 days in the last 5 years of Procter & Gamble, we see it is relatively greater, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (-33.7 days)
• During the last 3 years, the maximum reduction from previous high is -23.2 days, which is higher, thus better than the value of -33.7 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). 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 time in days below previous high water mark over 5 years of Procter & Gamble is 283 days, which is greater, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (139 days) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the maximum days below previous high is 191 days, which is higher, thus worse than the value of 139 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.'

• Looking at the average time in days below previous high water mark of 54 days in the last 5 years of Procter & Gamble, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (36 days)
• Compared with SPY (45 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the average time in days below previous high water mark of 42 days is smaller, thus better.