'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:- The total return, or performance over 5 years of Exxon Mobil is 1%, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (66.2%) in the same period.
- During the last 3 years, the total return, or performance is 6.7%, which is lower, thus worse than the value of 45.7% from the benchmark.

'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.'

Which means for our asset as example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (10.7%) in the period of the last 5 years, the annual performance (CAGR) of 0.2% of Exxon Mobil is lower, thus worse.
- Looking at annual return (CAGR) in of 2.2% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (13.4%).

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (13.3%) in the period of the last 5 years, the volatility of 18.7% of Exxon Mobil is greater, thus worse.
- During the last 3 years, the 30 days standard deviation is 16.9%, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 12.5% from the benchmark.

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

Which means for our asset as example:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (14.6%) in the period of the last 5 years, the downside volatility of 19% of Exxon Mobil is greater, thus worse.
- Looking at downside risk in of 18% in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus worse in comparison to SPY (14.1%).

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- The ratio of return and volatility (Sharpe) over 5 years of Exxon Mobil is -0.12, which is smaller, thus worse compared to the benchmark SPY (0.62) in the same period.
- Compared with SPY (0.87) in the period of the last 3 years, the Sharpe Ratio of -0.02 is smaller, thus worse.

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Looking at the ratio of annual return and downside deviation of -0.12 in the last 5 years of Exxon Mobil, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (0.56)
- During the last 3 years, the ratio of annual return and downside deviation is -0.02, which is smaller, thus worse than the value of 0.77 from the benchmark.

'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.'

Using this definition on our asset we see for example:- Looking at the Ulcer Ratio of 14 in the last 5 years of Exxon Mobil, we see it is relatively higher, thus better in comparison to the benchmark SPY (3.96 )
- Looking at Ulcer Ratio in of 9.87 in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively greater, thus better in comparison to SPY (4.01 ).

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Looking at the maximum reduction from previous high of -31.5 days in the last 5 years of Exxon Mobil, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to the benchmark SPY (-19.3 days)
- Looking at maximum drop from peak to valley in of -24.2 days in the period of the last 3 years, we see it is relatively lower, thus worse in comparison to SPY (-19.3 days).

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (187 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark of 1196 days of Exxon Mobil is greater, thus worse.
- During the last 3 years, the maximum time in days below previous high water mark is 676 days, which is greater, thus worse than the value of 131 days from the benchmark.

'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.'

Applying this definition to our asset in some examples:- Compared with the benchmark SPY (39 days) in the period of the last 5 years, the average days under water of 577 days of Exxon Mobil is greater, thus worse.
- During the last 3 years, the average days below previous high is 315 days, which is higher, thus worse than the value of 34 days from the benchmark.

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

- "Year" returns in the table above are not equal to the sum of monthly returns due to compounding.
- Performance results of Exxon Mobil 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.