Procter & Gamble (PG)

TotalReturn:

'The total return on a portfolio of investments takes into account not only the capital appreciation on the portfolio, but also the income received on the portfolio. The income typically consists of interest, dividends, and securities lending fees. This contrasts with the price return, which takes into account only the capital gain on an investment.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (89.4%) in the period of the last 5 years, the total return, or increase in value of 43.5% of Procter & Gamble is lower, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the total return is 24%, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of 76.1% from the benchmark.

CAGR:

'The compound annual growth rate isn't a true return rate, but rather a representational figure. It is essentially a number that describes the rate at which an investment would have grown if it had grown the same rate every year and the profits were reinvested at the end of each year. In reality, this sort of performance is unlikely. However, CAGR can be used to smooth returns so that they may be more easily understood when compared to alternative investments.'

• Looking at the annual return (CAGR) of 7.5% in the last 5 years of Procter & Gamble, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (13.7%)
• Compared with SPY (20.9%) in the period of the last 3 years, the annual return (CAGR) of 7.5% is smaller, 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.'

• The historical 30 days volatility over 5 years of Procter & Gamble is 17.3%, which is greater, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (17.1%) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the historical 30 days volatility is 16.4%, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 15.2% from the benchmark.

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.'

• The downside volatility over 5 years of Procter & Gamble is 12.5%, which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (11.8%) in the same period.
• Looking at downside risk in of 11.8% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to SPY (10.2%).

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.'

• The Sharpe Ratio over 5 years of Procter & Gamble is 0.29, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.65) in the same period.
• Looking at Sharpe Ratio in of 0.3 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (1.21).

Sortino:

'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.'

• Looking at the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of 0.4 in the last 5 years of Procter & Gamble, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.95)
• Looking at downside risk / excess return profile in of 0.42 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to SPY (1.81).

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.'

• Looking at the Ulcer Ratio of 8.36 in the last 5 years of Procter & Gamble, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (8.42 )
• Compared with SPY (3.42 ) in the period of the last 3 years, the Ulcer Index of 7.75 is greater, thus worse.

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 drop from peak to valley over 5 years of Procter & Gamble is -23.8 days, which is greater, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (-24.5 days) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (-18.8 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum drop from peak to valley of -21.1 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 time in days below previous high water mark 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.
• Compared with SPY (87 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum days under water of 304 days is higher, thus worse.

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (119 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the average days below previous high of 127 days of Procter & Gamble is greater, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (19 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the average days below previous high of 83 days is higher, thus worse.