Exxon Mobil (XOM)

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.'

• The total return, or performance over 5 years of Exxon Mobil is 239.8%, which is higher, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (93.2%) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (80.1%) in the period of the last 3 years, the total return of 53.7% is lower, thus worse.

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 (14.1%) in the period of the last 5 years, the compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 27.8% of Exxon Mobil is larger, thus better.
• Looking at annual return (CAGR) in of 15.5% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (21.8%).

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.'

• Looking at the volatility of 26.7% in the last 5 years of Exxon Mobil, we see it is relatively higher, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (17%)
• 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:

'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.'

• Looking at the downside volatility of 18.2% in the last 5 years of Exxon Mobil, we see it is relatively larger, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (11.7%)
• Compared with SPY (10.1%) in the period of the last 3 years, the downside risk of 16% is higher, 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.'

• The Sharpe Ratio over 5 years of Exxon Mobil is 0.95, which is larger, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (0.68) in the same period.
• During the last 3 years, the Sharpe Ratio is 0.57, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 1.28 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.'

• Looking at the excess return divided by the downside deviation of 1.39 in the last 5 years of Exxon Mobil, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.99)
• Looking at ratio of annual return and downside deviation in of 0.81 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively smaller, thus worse in comparison to SPY (1.91).

Ulcer:

'The Ulcer Index is a technical indicator that measures downside risk, in terms of both the depth and duration of price declines. The index increases in value as the price moves farther away from a recent high and falls as the price rises to new highs. The indicator is usually calculated over a 14-day period, with the Ulcer Index showing the percentage drawdown a trader can expect from the high over that period. The greater the value of the Ulcer Index, the longer it takes for a stock to get back to the former high.'

• Compared with the benchmark SPY (8.42 ) in the period of the last 5 years, the Ulcer Index of 8.55 of Exxon Mobil is larger, thus worse.
• Compared with SPY (3.4 ) in the period of the last 3 years, the Ulcer Index of 8.94 is higher, thus worse.

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 DrawDown over 5 years of Exxon Mobil is -20.5 days, which is greater, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (-24.5 days) in the same period.
• Looking at maximum reduction from previous high in of -18.9 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). 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'

• The maximum days under water over 5 years of Exxon Mobil is 306 days, which is smaller, thus better compared to the benchmark SPY (488 days) in the same period.
• Compared with SPY (87 days) in the period of the last 3 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark of 306 days is greater, thus worse.

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.'

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