Starbucks (SBUX)

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 Starbucks is -2.1%, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (85.1%) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (85.5%) in the period of the last 3 years, the total return of 14.2% is smaller, thus worse.

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 (13.2%) in the period of the last 5 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of -0.4% of Starbucks is lower, thus worse.
• Looking at annual performance (CAGR) in of 4.5% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (23%).

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.'

• Looking at the historical 30 days volatility of 31.9% in the last 5 years of Starbucks, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (17.1%)
• During the last 3 years, the volatility is 33.1%, which is higher, thus worse than the value of 15.3% 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 risk of 21% of Starbucks is higher, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (10.1%) in the period of the last 3 years, the downside deviation of 21.1% is larger, 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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.62) in the period of the last 5 years, the ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) of -0.09 of Starbucks is lower, thus worse.
• Looking at risk / return profile (Sharpe) in of 0.06 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 ratio of annual return and downside deviation of -0.14 in the last 5 years of Starbucks, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.91)
• During the last 3 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation is 0.1, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 2.02 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 Ulcer Ratio of 19 in the last 5 years of Starbucks, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (8.45 )
• Looking at Ulcer Index in of 18 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (3.22 ).

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (-24.5 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum DrawDown of -39.8 days of Starbucks is smaller, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the maximum drop from peak to valley is -32 days, which is lower, thus worse than the value of -18.8 days from the benchmark.

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.'

• The maximum days below previous high over 5 years of Starbucks is 441 days, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (488 days) in the same period.
• Looking at maximum time in days below previous high water mark in of 409 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (87 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.'

• Looking at the average time in days below previous high water mark of 192 days in the last 5 years of Starbucks, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (118 days)
• During the last 3 years, the average days below previous high is 176 days, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 17 days from the benchmark.