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.'

• The total return, or performance over 5 years of Procter & Gamble is 15.3%, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (84.5%) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (78%) in the period of the last 3 years, the total return, or performance of 2.9% is smaller, thus worse.

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (13.1%) in the period of the last 5 years, the annual performance (CAGR) of 2.9% of Procter & Gamble is smaller, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the annual return (CAGR) is 0.9%, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 21.3% from the benchmark.

Volatility:

'Volatility is a rate at which the price of a security increases or decreases for a given set of returns. Volatility is measured by calculating the standard deviation of the annualized returns over a given period of time. It shows the range to which the price of a security may increase or decrease. Volatility measures the risk of a security. It is used in option pricing formula to gauge the fluctuations in the returns of the underlying assets. Volatility indicates the pricing behavior of the security and helps estimate the fluctuations that may happen in a short period of time.'

• Looking at the historical 30 days volatility of 18.1% in the last 5 years of Procter & Gamble, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (17.2%)
• Compared with SPY (15.3%) in the period of the last 3 years, the 30 days standard deviation of 17.8% 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.'

• The downside risk over 5 years of Procter & Gamble is 13.1%, which is greater, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (11.8%) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (10.2%) in the period of the last 3 years, the downside risk of 12.9% is greater, thus worse.

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.'

• The ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) over 5 years of Procter & Gamble is 0.02, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.62) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (1.23) in the period of the last 3 years, the Sharpe Ratio of -0.09 is lower, thus worse.

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 ratio of annual return and downside deviation over 5 years of Procter & Gamble is 0.03, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.89) in the same period.
• Looking at downside risk / excess return profile in of -0.12 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (1.83).

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 (8.45 ) in the period of the last 5 years, the Downside risk index of 9.75 of Procter & Gamble is larger, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the Ulcer Index is 9.96 , which is higher, thus worse than the value of 3.3 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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (-24.5 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 (-18.8 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum reduction from previous high of -21.1 days is lower, thus worse.

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) in days.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (488 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum days under water of 449 days of Procter & Gamble is smaller, thus better.
• Looking at maximum days below previous high in of 449 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (87 days).

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.'

• The average time in days below previous high water mark over 5 years of Procter & Gamble is 169 days, which is greater, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (118 days) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (17 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the average days under water of 147 days is larger, thus worse.