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 (73.6%) in the period of the last 5 years, the total return, or performance of 17.3% of Procter & Gamble is smaller, thus worse.
• Looking at total return, or performance in of 0.2% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (67.4%).

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 (11.7%) in the period of the last 5 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 3.2% of Procter & Gamble is smaller, thus worse.
• Looking at annual return (CAGR) in of 0.1% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to SPY (18.9%).

Volatility:

'Volatility is a statistical measure of the dispersion of returns for a given security or market index. Volatility can either be measured by using the standard deviation or variance between returns from that same security or market index. Commonly, the higher the volatility, the riskier the security. In the securities markets, volatility is often associated with big swings in either direction. For example, when the stock market rises and falls more than one percent over a sustained period of time, it is called a 'volatile' market.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (17%) in the period of the last 5 years, the volatility of 17.4% of Procter & Gamble is larger, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (15.1%) in the period of the last 3 years, the historical 30 days volatility of 16.8% is higher, thus worse.

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 deviation of 12.7% of Procter & Gamble is greater, thus worse.
• Looking at downside volatility in of 12.3% 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 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 ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) of 0.04 in the last 5 years of Procter & Gamble, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.54)
• During the last 3 years, the ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) is -0.14, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of 1.08 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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.78) in the period of the last 5 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of 0.06 of Procter & Gamble is lower, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the downside risk / excess return profile is -0.2, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of 1.61 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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (8.45 ) in the period of the last 5 years, the Downside risk index of 8.63 of Procter & Gamble is greater, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (3.5 ) in the period of the last 3 years, the Ulcer Index of 8.24 is larger, thus worse.

MaxDD:

'A maximum drawdown is the maximum loss from a peak to a trough of a portfolio, before a new peak is attained. Maximum Drawdown is an indicator of downside risk over a specified time period. It can be used both as a stand-alone measure or as an input into other metrics such as 'Return over Maximum Drawdown' and the Calmar Ratio. Maximum Drawdown is expressed in percentage terms.'

• 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 greater, thus better.
• During the last 3 years, the maximum drop from peak to valley is -21.1 days, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of -18.8 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'

• Looking at the maximum days under water of 439 days in the last 5 years of Procter & Gamble, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (488 days)
• Compared with SPY (87 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum days under water of 335 days is larger, thus worse.

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 (119 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the average days below previous high of 134 days of Procter & Gamble is higher, thus worse.
• Looking at average days under water in of 95 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (20 days).