'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (81.9%) in the period of the last 5 years, the total return of 96.2% of Willis Towers Watson is higher, thus better.
- During the last 3 years, the total return is 59.1%, which is larger, thus better than the value of 46.1% from the benchmark.

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (12.7%) in the period of the last 5 years, the annual performance (CAGR) of 14.4% of Willis Towers Watson is greater, thus better.
- Compared with SPY (13.5%) in the period of the last 3 years, the annual return (CAGR) of 16.7% is greater, thus better.

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (19.8%) in the period of the last 5 years, the volatility of 25.5% of Willis Towers Watson is higher, thus worse.
- During the last 3 years, the volatility is 29.7%, which is higher, thus worse than the value of 23% from the benchmark.

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (14.5%) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside volatility of 17.8% of Willis Towers Watson is higher, thus worse.
- Looking at downside deviation in of 20.7% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (16.8%).

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (0.52) in the period of the last 5 years, the risk / return profile (Sharpe) of 0.47 of Willis Towers Watson is lower, thus worse.
- Compared with SPY (0.48) in the period of the last 3 years, the Sharpe Ratio of 0.48 is higher, thus better.

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- Looking at the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of 0.67 in the last 5 years of Willis Towers Watson, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.7)
- Compared with SPY (0.65) in the period of the last 3 years, the downside risk / excess return profile of 0.68 is greater, thus better.

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Looking at the Ulcer Index of 7.99 in the last 5 years of Willis Towers Watson, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (6.08 )
- Looking at Downside risk index in of 9.23 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (6.77 ).

'A maximum drawdown is the maximum loss from a peak to a trough of a portfolio, before a new peak is attained. Maximum Drawdown is an indicator of downside risk over a specified time period. It can be used both as a stand-alone measure or as an input into other metrics such as 'Return over Maximum Drawdown' and the Calmar Ratio. Maximum Drawdown is expressed in percentage terms.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (-33.7 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum reduction from previous high of -32.9 days of Willis Towers Watson is greater, thus better.
- Compared with SPY (-33.7 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum drop from peak to valley of -32.9 days is larger, thus better.

'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) in days.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (139 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum days below previous high of 252 days of Willis Towers Watson is greater, thus worse.
- Compared with SPY (119 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark of 252 days is higher, thus worse.

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Looking at the average time in days below previous high water mark of 60 days in the last 5 years of Willis Towers Watson, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (35 days)
- Compared with SPY (27 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the average time in days below previous high water mark of 77 days is larger, thus worse.

Historical returns have been extended using synthetic data.
[Show Details]

- Note that yearly returns do not equal the sum of monthly returns due to compounding.
- Performance results of Willis Towers Watson are hypothetical, do not account for slippage, fees or taxes, and are based on backtesting, which has many inherent limitations, some of which are described in our Terms of Use.