Willis Towers Watson (WLTW)

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.'

• Looking at the total return, or performance of 96.2% in the last 5 years of Willis Towers Watson, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (107.6%)
• During the last 3 years, the total return is 59.1%, which is larger, thus better than the value of 48.1% from the benchmark.

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 (15.8%) in the period of the last 5 years, the annual performance (CAGR) of 14.4% of Willis Towers Watson is smaller, thus worse.
• Looking at compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) in of 16.7% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to SPY (14%).

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 25.5% in the last 5 years of Willis Towers Watson, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (17.9%)
• During the last 3 years, the historical 30 days volatility is 29.7%, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 18.3% from the benchmark.

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.'

• The downside deviation over 5 years of Willis Towers Watson is 17.8%, which is higher, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (12.5%) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (12.4%) in the period of the last 3 years, the downside risk of 20.7% is greater, 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.'

• Looking at the risk / return profile (Sharpe) 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 (0.74)
• Compared with SPY (0.63) in the period of the last 3 years, the risk / return profile (Sharpe) of 0.48 is smaller, thus worse.

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.'

• The excess return divided by the downside deviation over 5 years of Willis Towers Watson is 0.67, which is lower, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (1.06) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation is 0.68, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of 0.93 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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (8.48 ) in the period of the last 5 years, the Ulcer Index of 7.99 of Willis Towers Watson is lower, thus better.
• Compared with SPY (5.54 ) in the period of the last 3 years, the Downside risk index of 9.23 is greater, thus worse.

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 -32.9 days in the last 5 years of Willis Towers Watson, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (-24.5 days)
• Looking at maximum DrawDown in of -32.9 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (-18.8 days).

MaxDuration:

'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.'

• The maximum time in days below previous high water mark over 5 years of Willis Towers Watson is 252 days, which is lower, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (488 days) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark is 252 days, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 199 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 lower, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (119 days)
• Compared with SPY (45 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the average time in days below previous high water mark of 77 days is greater, thus worse.