Exxon Mobil (XOM)

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 increase in value over 5 years of Exxon Mobil is 199.7%, which is higher, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (90.3%) in the same period.
• Looking at total return, or increase in value in of 48% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (75.4%).

CAGR:

'Compound annual growth rate (CAGR) is a business and investing specific term for the geometric progression ratio that provides a constant rate of return over the time period. CAGR is not an accounting term, but it is often used to describe some element of the business, for example revenue, units delivered, registered users, etc. CAGR dampens the effect of volatility of periodic returns that can render arithmetic means irrelevant. It is particularly useful to compare growth rates from various data sets of common domain such as revenue growth of companies in the same industry.'

• The annual performance (CAGR) over 5 years of Exxon Mobil is 24.7%, which is higher, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (13.8%) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the annual performance (CAGR) is 14%, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 20.7% from the benchmark.

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%) in the period of the last 5 years, the volatility of 26.6% of Exxon Mobil is higher, thus worse.
• Looking at volatility in of 22.9% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (15.1%).

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 (11.7%) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside risk of 18.3% of Exxon Mobil is higher, thus worse.
• Looking at downside volatility in of 16% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (10.1%).

Sharpe:

'The Sharpe ratio (also known as the Sharpe index, the Sharpe measure, and the reward-to-variability ratio) is a way to examine the performance of an investment by adjusting for its risk. The ratio measures the excess return (or risk premium) per unit of deviation in an investment asset or a trading strategy, typically referred to as risk, named after William F. Sharpe.'

• Looking at the risk / return profile (Sharpe) of 0.83 in the last 5 years of Exxon Mobil, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.67)
• During the last 3 years, the Sharpe Ratio is 0.5, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 1.2 from the benchmark.

Sortino:

'The Sortino ratio, a variation of the Sharpe ratio only factors in the downside, or negative volatility, rather than the total volatility used in calculating the Sharpe ratio. The theory behind the Sortino variation is that upside volatility is a plus for the investment, and it, therefore, should not be included in the risk calculation. Therefore, the Sortino ratio takes upside volatility out of the equation and uses only the downside standard deviation in its calculation instead of the total standard deviation that is used in calculating the Sharpe ratio.'

• Looking at the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of 1.21 in the last 5 years of Exxon Mobil, we see it is relatively larger, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.97)
• Compared with SPY (1.8) in the period of the last 3 years, the excess return divided by the downside deviation of 0.72 is lower, thus worse.

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 (8.42 ) in the period of the last 5 years, the Ulcer Ratio of 8.55 of Exxon Mobil is greater, thus worse.
• Looking at Ulcer Ratio in of 8.94 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (3.4 ).

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.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (-24.5 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum DrawDown of -20.5 days of Exxon Mobil is higher, thus better.
• Looking at maximum drop from peak to valley in of -18.9 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, 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). Many assume Max DD Duration is the length of time between new highs during which the Max DD (magnitude) occurred. But that isn’t always the case. The Max DD duration is the longest time between peaks, period. So it could be the time when the program also had its biggest peak to valley loss (and usually is, because the program needs a long time to recover from the largest loss), but it doesn’t have to be'

• Looking at the maximum days below previous high of 306 days in the last 5 years of Exxon Mobil, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (488 days)
• During the last 3 years, the maximum days under water is 306 days, which is larger, thus worse than the value of 87 days from the benchmark.

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.'

• Looking at the average time in days below previous high water mark of 68 days in the last 5 years of Exxon Mobil, we see it is relatively lower, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (119 days)
• Looking at average time in days below previous high water mark in of 94 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to SPY (19 days).