Raytheon (RTX)

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.'

• The total return over 5 years of Raytheon is 193.7%, which is higher, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (95.7%) in the same period.
• Looking at total return, or increase in value in of 98.5% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus better in comparison to SPY (85.8%).

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (14.4%) in the period of the last 5 years, the annual performance (CAGR) of 24.1% of Raytheon is larger, thus better.
• During the last 3 years, the annual performance (CAGR) is 25.8%, which is larger, thus better than the value of 23% from the benchmark.

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 (17.1%) in the period of the last 5 years, the volatility of 23.8% of Raytheon is greater, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (15.3%) in the period of the last 3 years, the 30 days standard deviation of 23.3% is higher, thus worse.

DownVol:

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

• Looking at the downside risk of 16.2% in the last 5 years of Raytheon, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (11.8%)
• Compared with SPY (10.2%) in the period of the last 3 years, the downside deviation of 16.1% is higher, thus worse.

Sharpe:

'The Sharpe ratio was developed by Nobel laureate William F. Sharpe, and is used to help investors understand the return of an investment compared to its risk. The ratio is the average return earned in excess of the risk-free rate per unit of volatility or total risk. Subtracting the risk-free rate from the mean return allows an investor to better isolate the profits associated with risk-taking activities. One intuition of this calculation is that a portfolio engaging in 'zero risk' investments, such as the purchase of U.S. Treasury bills (for which the expected return is the risk-free rate), has a Sharpe ratio of exactly zero. Generally, the greater the value of the Sharpe ratio, the more attractive the risk-adjusted return.'

• Looking at the Sharpe Ratio of 0.91 in the last 5 years of Raytheon, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.7)
• Looking at risk / return profile (Sharpe) in of 1 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (1.34).

Sortino:

'The Sortino ratio measures the risk-adjusted return of an investment asset, portfolio, or strategy. It is a modification of the Sharpe ratio but penalizes only those returns falling below a user-specified target or required rate of return, while the Sharpe ratio penalizes both upside and downside volatility equally. Though both ratios measure an investment's risk-adjusted return, they do so in significantly different ways that will frequently lead to differing conclusions as to the true nature of the investment's return-generating efficiency. The Sortino ratio is used as a way to compare the risk-adjusted performance of programs with differing risk and return profiles. In general, risk-adjusted returns seek to normalize the risk across programs and then see which has the higher return unit per risk.'

• Looking at the downside risk / excess return profile of 1.34 in the last 5 years of Raytheon, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (1.01)
• Looking at downside risk / excess return profile in of 1.44 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (2.02).

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 9.19 in the last 5 years of Raytheon, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (8.42 )
• During the last 3 years, the Downside risk index is 10 , which is larger, thus worse than the value of 3.51 from the benchmark.

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 reduction from previous high over 5 years of Raytheon is -32.8 days, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (-24.5 days) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the maximum DrawDown is -32.8 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'

• The maximum time in days below previous high water mark over 5 years of Raytheon is 247 days, which is smaller, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (488 days) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the maximum days under water is 243 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 (119 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the average time in days below previous high water mark of 63 days of Raytheon is smaller, thus better.
• During the last 3 years, the average days under water is 55 days, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 21 days from the benchmark.