Starbucks (SBUX)

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 increase in value over 5 years of Starbucks is 8.8%, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (98.3%) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the total return, or increase in value is -16.9%, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of 27.2% 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 annual return (CAGR) of 1.7% in the last 5 years of Starbucks, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (14.7%)
• Compared with SPY (8.4%) in the period of the last 3 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of -6% is lower, thus worse.

Volatility:

'In finance, volatility (symbol σ) is the degree of variation of a trading price series over time as measured by the standard deviation of logarithmic returns. Historic volatility measures a time series of past market prices. Implied volatility looks forward in time, being derived from the market price of a market-traded derivative (in particular, an option). Commonly, the higher the volatility, the riskier the security.'

• The volatility over 5 years of Starbucks is 33.8%, which is greater, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (20.9%) in the same period.
• Looking at 30 days standard deviation in of 32.8% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to SPY (17.7%).

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (14.9%) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside volatility of 22.5% of Starbucks is greater, thus worse.
• Looking at downside volatility in of 21.3% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (12.4%).

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.58) in the period of the last 5 years, the Sharpe Ratio of -0.02 of Starbucks is lower, thus worse.
• Looking at ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) in of -0.26 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to SPY (0.33).

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 -0.04 in the last 5 years of Starbucks, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.82)
• Compared with SPY (0.47) in the period of the last 3 years, the downside risk / excess return profile of -0.4 is lower, thus worse.

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 Ulcer Ratio of 20 in the last 5 years of Starbucks, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (9.32 )
• Looking at Ulcer Index in of 21 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to SPY (10 ).

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 DrawDown of -43.7 days in the last 5 years of Starbucks, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (-33.7 days)
• Compared with SPY (-24.5 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum DrawDown of -40.7 days is smaller, thus worse.

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.'

• Looking at the maximum days under water of 785 days in the last 5 years of Starbucks, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (488 days)
• Looking at maximum days below previous high in of 752 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (488 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 Starbucks is 273 days, which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (123 days) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (177 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the average days under water of 377 days is higher, thus worse.