Willis Towers Watson (WLTW)

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (83.2%) in the period of the last 5 years, the total return, or performance of 96.2% of Willis Towers Watson is higher, thus better.
• Looking at total return, or performance in of 59.1% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (81.9%).

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (12.9%) in the period of the last 5 years, the annual return (CAGR) of 14.4% of Willis Towers Watson is larger, thus better.
• Looking at annual return (CAGR) in of 16.7% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (22.2%).

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 (17.2%) in the period of the last 5 years, the 30 days standard deviation of 25.5% of Willis Towers Watson is higher, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (15.3%) in the period of the last 3 years, the volatility of 29.7% is larger, thus worse.

DownVol:

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

• The downside deviation over 5 years of Willis Towers Watson is 17.8%, which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (11.8%) in the same period.
• Looking at downside deviation in of 20.7% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to SPY (10.2%).

Sharpe:

'The Sharpe ratio is the measure of risk-adjusted return of a financial portfolio. Sharpe ratio is a measure of excess portfolio return over the risk-free rate relative to its standard deviation. Normally, the 90-day Treasury bill rate is taken as the proxy for risk-free rate. A portfolio with a higher Sharpe ratio is considered superior relative to its peers. The measure was named after William F Sharpe, a Nobel laureate and professor of finance, emeritus at Stanford University.'

• Looking at the Sharpe Ratio of 0.47 in the last 5 years of Willis Towers Watson, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.61)
• During the last 3 years, the Sharpe Ratio is 0.48, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 1.28 from the benchmark.

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.'

• The excess return divided by the downside deviation over 5 years of Willis Towers Watson is 0.67, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.88) in the same period.
• Looking at downside risk / excess return profile in of 0.68 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (1.92).

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 Willis Towers Watson is 7.99 , which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (8.46 ) in the same period.
• Looking at Downside risk index in of 9.23 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to SPY (3.37 ).

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.'

• Looking at the maximum DrawDown of -32.9 days in the last 5 years of Willis Towers Watson, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (-24.5 days)
• During the last 3 years, the maximum DrawDown is -32.9 days, which is smaller, 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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (488 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum days under water of 252 days of Willis Towers Watson is smaller, thus better.
• During the last 3 years, the maximum days under water is 252 days, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 87 days from the benchmark.

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 days under water of 60 days in the last 5 years of Willis Towers Watson, we see it is relatively smaller, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (118 days)
• During the last 3 years, the average days under water is 77 days, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 18 days from the benchmark.