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 (81.7%) in the period of the last 5 years, the total return of 28.3% of Procter & Gamble is lower, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the total return, or performance is 15.7%, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 89.3% from the benchmark.

CAGR:

'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.'

• Looking at the annual return (CAGR) of 5.1% in the last 5 years of Procter & Gamble, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (12.8%)
• During the last 3 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) is 5%, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of 23.9% 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.'

• The historical 30 days volatility over 5 years of Procter & Gamble is 18.2%, which is greater, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (17.1%) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the 30 days standard deviation is 18%, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 15.2% from the benchmark.

DownVol:

'The downside volatility is similar to the volatility, or standard deviation, but only takes losing/negative periods into account.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (11.8%) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside volatility of 13.1% of Procter & Gamble is larger, thus worse.
• Looking at downside deviation in of 12.9% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to SPY (10.1%).

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 0.14, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.6) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the risk / return profile (Sharpe) is 0.14, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 1.4 from the benchmark.

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 excess return divided by the downside deviation of 0.2 in the last 5 years of Procter & Gamble, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.87)
• During the last 3 years, the excess return divided by the downside deviation is 0.2, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 2.11 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.'

• Looking at the Downside risk index of 9.9 in the last 5 years of Procter & Gamble, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (8.45 )
• Looking at Ulcer Ratio in of 10 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to SPY (3.2 ).

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 DrawDown of -23.8 days in the last 5 years of Procter & Gamble, we see it is relatively greater, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (-24.5 days)
• Looking at maximum reduction from previous high in of -21.2 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (-18.8 days).

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (488 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum days under water of 471 days of Procter & Gamble is lower, thus better.
• During the last 3 years, the maximum days below previous high is 471 days, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 87 days from the benchmark.

AveDuration:

'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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (118 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the average days below previous high of 178 days of Procter & Gamble is greater, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the average time in days below previous high water mark is 162 days, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 17 days from the benchmark.