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, or increase in value over 5 years of Raytheon is 178.6%, which is larger, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (110.4%) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the total return, or performance is 77.9%, which is higher, thus better than the value of 72.5% 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 compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 22.8% in the last 5 years of Raytheon, we see it is relatively greater, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (16.1%)
• During the last 3 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) is 21.3%, which is higher, thus better than the value of 20.1% 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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (17.5%) in the period of the last 5 years, the 30 days standard deviation of 25.4% of Raytheon is larger, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (17.5%) in the period of the last 3 years, the historical 30 days volatility of 23.7% is higher, thus worse.

DownVol:

'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.'

• Looking at the downside deviation of 17.2% in the last 5 years of Raytheon, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (12.1%)
• During the last 3 years, the downside volatility is 16.8%, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 11.5% from the benchmark.

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.'

• Looking at the Sharpe Ratio of 0.8 in the last 5 years of Raytheon, we see it is relatively greater, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.78)
• Compared with SPY (1.01) in the period of the last 3 years, the Sharpe Ratio of 0.79 is lower, thus worse.

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 (1.13) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside risk / excess return profile of 1.18 of Raytheon is higher, thus better.
• Looking at excess return divided by the downside deviation in of 1.12 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (1.53).

Ulcer:

'Ulcer Index is a method for measuring investment risk that addresses the real concerns of investors, unlike the widely used standard deviation of return. UI is a measure of the depth and duration of drawdowns in prices from earlier highs. Using Ulcer Index instead of standard deviation can lead to very different conclusions about investment risk and risk-adjusted return, especially when evaluating strategies that seek to avoid major declines in portfolio value (market timing, dynamic asset allocation, hedge funds, etc.). The Ulcer Index was originally developed in 1987. Since then, it has been widely recognized and adopted by the investment community. According to Nelson Freeburg, editor of Formula Research, Ulcer Index is “perhaps the most fully realized statistical portrait of risk there is.'

• The Ulcer Ratio over 5 years of Raytheon is 9.38 , which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (8.48 ) in the same period.
• 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 (5.31 ).

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.'

• Looking at the maximum reduction from previous high of -32.8 days in the last 5 years of Raytheon, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (-24.5 days)
• During the last 3 years, the maximum DrawDown is -32.8 days, which is lower, 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'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (488 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum days under water of 247 days of Raytheon is smaller, thus better.
• Looking at maximum time in days below previous high water mark in of 243 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to SPY (199 days).

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 (120 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the average days below previous high of 65 days of Raytheon is smaller, thus better.
• During the last 3 years, the average days below previous high is 55 days, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 47 days from the benchmark.