The Procter & Gamble Company Common Stock

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Looking at the total return, or performance of 126.4% in the last 5 years of Procter & Gamble, we see it is relatively larger, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (83.6%)
- Looking at total return in of 61.5% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus better in comparison to SPY (36.9%).

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Looking at the annual return (CAGR) of 17.8% in the last 5 years of Procter & Gamble, we see it is relatively greater, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (12.9%)
- During the last 3 years, the annual return (CAGR) is 17.3%, which is greater, thus better than the value of 11.1% from the benchmark.

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (18.8%) in the period of the last 5 years, the volatility of 20.1% of Procter & Gamble is greater, thus worse.
- Compared with SPY (22.4%) in the period of the last 3 years, the 30 days standard deviation of 23.6% is larger, thus worse.

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- The downside risk over 5 years of Procter & Gamble is 13.4%, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (13.7%) in the same period.
- During the last 3 years, the downside deviation is 15.9%, which is lower, thus better than the value of 16.5% from the benchmark.

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.55) in the period of the last 5 years, the Sharpe Ratio of 0.76 of Procter & Gamble is larger, thus better.
- During the last 3 years, the ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) is 0.63, which is greater, thus better than the value of 0.38 from the benchmark.

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Looking at the downside risk / excess return profile of 1.13 in the last 5 years of Procter & Gamble, we see it is relatively greater, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.76)
- During the last 3 years, the excess return divided by the downside deviation is 0.93, which is greater, thus better than the value of 0.52 from the benchmark.

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Looking at the Ulcer Index of 6.62 in the last 5 years of Procter & Gamble, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (5.78 )
- During the last 3 years, the Ulcer Ratio is 7.75 , which is larger, thus worse than the value of 7.07 from the benchmark.

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- 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 larger, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (-33.7 days)
- Compared with SPY (-33.7 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum drop from peak to valley of -23.2 days is greater, thus better.

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (139 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum days below previous high of 283 days of Procter & Gamble is higher, thus worse.
- During the last 3 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark is 191 days, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 139 days from the benchmark.

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- The average time in days below previous high water mark over 5 years of Procter & Gamble is 55 days, which is larger, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (37 days) in the same period.
- Compared with SPY (45 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the average days under water of 43 days is lower, thus better.

Historical returns have been extended using synthetic data.
[Show Details]

- Note that yearly returns do not equal the sum of monthly returns due to compounding.
- Performance results of Procter & Gamble are hypothetical, do not account for slippage, fees or taxes, and are based on backtesting, which has many inherent limitations, some of which are described in our Terms of Use.