Ulta Beauty (ULTA)

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 performance over 5 years of Ulta Beauty is 42.8%, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (85.2%) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the total return is 36.4%, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 85% 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.'

• The compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) over 5 years of Ulta Beauty is 7.4%, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (13.2%) in the same period.
• Looking at annual performance (CAGR) in of 11% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to SPY (22.9%).

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 (17.2%) in the period of the last 5 years, the volatility of 34.8% of Ulta Beauty is larger, thus worse.
• Looking at 30 days standard deviation in of 35.5% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (15.3%).

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 24% of Ulta Beauty is larger, thus worse.
• Looking at downside deviation in of 23.5% 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 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 risk / return profile (Sharpe) of 0.14 in the last 5 years of Ulta Beauty, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.62)
• During the last 3 years, the Sharpe Ratio is 0.24, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of 1.33 from the benchmark.

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.9) in the period of the last 5 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of 0.21 of Ulta Beauty is smaller, thus worse.
• During the last 3 years, the downside risk / excess return profile is 0.36, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 2 from the benchmark.

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 Ulta Beauty is 21 , which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (8.45 ) in the same period.
• Looking at Ulcer Ratio in of 24 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (3.23 ).

MaxDD:

'Maximum drawdown is defined as the peak-to-trough decline of an investment during a specific period. It is usually quoted as a percentage of the peak value. The maximum drawdown can be calculated based on absolute returns, in order to identify strategies that suffer less during market downturns, such as low-volatility strategies. However, the maximum drawdown can also be calculated based on returns relative to a benchmark index, for identifying strategies that show steady outperformance over time.'

• The maximum drop from peak to valley over 5 years of Ulta Beauty is -44.6 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 drop from peak to valley is -44.6 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 Ulta Beauty is 434 days, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (488 days) in the same period.
• Looking at maximum days below previous high in of 434 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (87 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.'

• The average days under water over 5 years of Ulta Beauty is 115 days, which is smaller, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (118 days) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the average time in days below previous high water mark is 150 days, which is higher, thus worse than the value of 17 days from the benchmark.