PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
失败案例, 2013-6
Performance
Return for Risk
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility
Diversification

Asset Allocation


GILD 16.67%CMCSA 16.67%QCOM 16.67%INTC 16.67%CSCO 16.67%ORCL 16.67%EquityEquity

S&P 500 Index

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right asset allocation for 失败案例, 2013-6

Add portfolio to the optimizer to find optimal allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer

Performance

Performance Chart

The chart shows the growth of an initial investment of $10,000 in 失败案例, 2013-6, comparing it to the performance of the S&P 500 index or another benchmark. All prices have been adjusted for splits and dividends. The portfolio is rebalanced Every 3 months.


Loading charts...

Returns By Period

As of Jun 13, 2026, the 失败案例, 2013-6 returned 51.46% Year-To-Date and 17.62% of annualized return in the last 10 years.


Position1D1MYTD6M1Y3Y*5Y*10Y*
Benchmark
S&P 500 Index
0.50%-0.93%8.56%8.85%24.33%19.37%11.84%13.61%
Portfolio
失败案例, 2013-6
2.86%2.47%51.46%52.67%77.62%31.61%18.21%17.62%
CMCSA
Comcast Corporation
2.21%-2.66%-5.28%3.97%-17.53%-8.98%-10.72%1.27%
CSCO
Cisco Systems, Inc.
-0.60%4.82%58.91%57.34%93.30%37.33%20.60%18.92%
GILD
Gilead Sciences, Inc.
-0.22%-4.90%2.90%5.60%16.40%21.02%17.08%7.84%
INTC
Intel Corporation
6.51%7.45%237.59%229.46%518.52%55.34%18.67%17.03%
ORCL
Oracle Corporation
0.02%-5.87%-4.95%-2.48%-13.59%17.80%18.90%18.60%
QCOM
QUALCOMM Incorporated
4.32%6.21%25.03%19.95%39.72%22.00%11.87%18.10%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Monthly Returns

Based on dividend-adjusted daily data since Jan 22, 1992, 失败案例, 2013-6's average daily return is +0.10%, while the average monthly return is +1.94%. At this rate, an investment would double in approximately 3.0 years.

Historically, 64% of months were positive and 36% were negative. The best month was Dec 1999 with a return of +42.0%, while the worst month was Aug 1998 at -20.6%. The longest winning streak lasted 13 consecutive months, and the longest losing streak was 5 months.

On a daily basis, 失败案例, 2013-6 closed higher 53% of trading days. The best single day was May 8, 2002 with a return of +13.4%, while the worst single day was Jul 15, 1996 at -11.9%.


JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDecTotal
20265.17%-0.89%-4.52%29.29%23.15%-4.41%51.46%
20251.73%6.48%-3.95%-5.18%4.57%12.34%-1.40%3.33%10.17%4.35%-3.24%-0.42%30.78%
2024-0.29%-2.11%5.15%-11.65%5.49%4.22%1.49%-4.12%7.15%0.22%4.98%-6.79%1.94%
20238.46%-4.97%8.91%-1.79%0.80%6.04%4.42%0.23%-4.42%-0.82%7.81%5.47%32.94%
2022-5.48%-4.78%0.27%-9.62%2.71%-8.07%3.79%-3.95%-13.63%15.70%9.70%-5.81%-20.73%
20212.68%0.63%6.21%0.77%1.81%1.45%3.47%2.96%-5.57%-1.02%5.66%4.02%25.01%

Benchmark Metrics

失败案例, 2013-6 has an annualized alpha of 12.93%, beta of 1.17, and R2 of 0.58 versus S&P 500 Index. Calculated based on daily prices since January 22, 1992.

  • This portfolio captured 161.66% of S&P 500 Index gains but only 98.80% of its losses - a favorable profile for investors.
  • This portfolio generated an annualized alpha of 12.93% versus S&P 500 Index - delivering returns beyond what market exposure alone would predict.

Alpha
12.93%
Beta
1.17
0.58
Upside Capture
161.66%
Downside Capture
98.80%

Expense Ratio

失败案例, 2013-6 has an expense ratio of 0.00%, meaning no management fees are charged. Below, you can find the expense ratios of the portfolio's funds side by side and easily compare their relative costs.


The portfolio doesn't include any funds that charge management fees.

Return for Risk

Risk / Return Rank

失败案例, 2013-6 ranks 91 for risk / return — in the top 91% of Portfolios on our site. This means strong returns relative to risk — exactly what professional investors look for. Well-suited for investors who want to maximize return per unit of risk.


失败案例, 2013-6 Risk / Return Rank: 9191
Overall Rank
失败案例, 2013-6 Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9191
Sharpe Ratio Rank
失败案例, 2013-6 Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
失败案例, 2013-6 Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
失败案例, 2013-6 Calmar Ratio Rank: 9595
Calmar Ratio Rank
失败案例, 2013-6 Martin Ratio Rank: 9090
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

Return / Risk — by metrics

The table below presents risk-adjusted performance metrics for 失败案例, 2013-6 and compares them with S&P 500 Index.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


PortfolioBenchmarkDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

2.97

1.86

+1.11

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

3.74

2.53

+1.21

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.52

1.34

+0.18

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

6.76

2.53

+4.23

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

19.97

11.37

+8.60


How much return does each position deliver for the risk it carries? Higher values mean better reward for the risk taken.

PositionRisk / Return RankSharpe ratioSortino ratioOmega ratioCalmar ratioMartin ratio
CMCSA
Comcast Corporation
16
-0.62-0.710.90-0.67-1.26
CSCO
Cisco Systems, Inc.
95
2.943.471.536.6918.37
GILD
Gilead Sciences, Inc.
58
0.571.031.120.701.99
INTC
Intel Corporation
99
6.845.301.6720.8548.84
ORCL
Oracle Corporation
38
-0.110.331.04-0.12-0.20
QCOM
QUALCOMM Incorporated
65
0.751.361.191.102.44

Sharpe Ratio

The Sharpe ratio helps investors understand how much return they're getting for the level of risk taken. A higher Sharpe ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance, meaning more reward for each unit of risk.

The current 失败案例, 2013-6 Sharpe ratio is 2.97 as of Jun 13, 2026 (the value is recalculated daily), calculated over the past 12 months.

Compared to the broad market, where average Sharpe ratios range from 1.54 to 2.41, this portfolio's current Sharpe ratio is in the top 25%. This signifies superior risk-adjusted performance, meaning the portfolio is delivering strong returns for the level of risk taken compared to most others.

The chart below shows the rolling Sharpe ratio of 失败案例, 2013-6 compared to the selected benchmark. This view highlights how the investment's risk-adjusted performance has changed over time.


Loading charts...

Dividends

Dividend yield

失败案例, 2013-6 provided a 2.98% dividend yield over the last twelve months.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
Portfolio2.98%2.01%2.38%2.41%3.23%2.29%2.57%2.47%2.97%2.40%2.57%2.35%
CMCSA
Comcast Corporation
11.84%4.35%3.25%2.60%3.03%1.95%1.72%1.40%2.69%1.18%1.96%1.73%
CSCO
Cisco Systems, Inc.
1.36%2.12%2.69%3.07%3.17%2.32%3.20%2.88%2.95%2.95%3.28%3.02%
GILD
Gilead Sciences, Inc.
1.91%2.57%3.33%3.70%3.40%3.91%4.67%3.88%3.65%2.90%2.57%1.27%
INTC
Intel Corporation
0.00%0.00%1.87%1.47%5.52%2.70%2.65%2.11%2.56%2.33%2.87%2.79%
ORCL
Oracle Corporation
1.09%0.97%0.96%1.44%1.57%1.38%1.48%1.72%1.68%1.52%1.56%1.56%
QCOM
QUALCOMM Incorporated
1.70%2.06%2.18%2.18%2.67%1.47%1.69%2.81%4.27%3.50%3.17%3.72%

Drawdowns

Drawdowns Chart

The Drawdowns chart displays portfolio losses from any high point along the way. Drawdowns are calculated considering price movements and all distributions paid, if any.


Loading charts...

Worst Drawdowns

The table below displays the maximum drawdowns of the 失败案例, 2013-6. A maximum drawdown is a measure of risk, indicating the largest reduction in portfolio value due to a series of losing trades.

The maximum drawdown for the 失败案例, 2013-6 was 63.24%, occurring on Oct 8, 2002. Recovery took 1008 trading sessions.

The current 失败案例, 2013-6 drawdown is 4.41%.


Related event

Drawdown

Fall

Recovery

Underwater

Dot-com crash2000–2002
-63.24%Oct 2002
2y 6mo4y 2d
6y 6moMar 2000 - Oct 2006
Financial crisis2007–2009
-40.45%Mar 2009
6mo 23d1y 10mo
2y 5moAug 2008 - Jan 2011
Bear market2022
-35.06%Sep 2022
8mo 21d1y 2mo
1y 11moJan 2022 - Dec 2023
1994 bear market1994
-31.42%May 1994
7mo 4d8mo 15d
1y 3moOct 1993 - Jan 1995
COVID crash2020
-23.82%Mar 2020
28d2mo 25d
3mo 23dFeb 2020 - Jun 2020

Volatility

Volatility Chart

The chart below shows the rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Diversification

Diversification Metrics


Number of Effective Assets

The portfolio contains 6 assets, with an effective number of assets of 6.00, reflecting the diversification based on asset allocation. Your capital is spread almost evenly across your holdings, indicating a well-balanced allocation. Note that true diversification also depends on the correlations between assets — check the diversification ratio below.


Diversification Ratio
1Y
3Y
5Y
10Y
All Time
Diversification Ratio

1.94

1.71

1.61

1.50

1.51

The portfolio has a diversification ratio of 1.51, in line with the typical range across portfolios. There's room to improve by adding less correlated assets.

失败案例, 2013-6 correlation to the S&P 500 Index

失败案例, 2013-6 has a 0.67 correlation to S&P 500 Index over the trailing 12 months. This section compares each holding's correlation to the benchmark and to the portfolio.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.67

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.72

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.78

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.79

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 22, 1992

0.74


Benchmark Correlations

Correlation vs. S&P 500 Index. CSCO has the highest benchmark correlation at 0.61, while GILD has the lowest at 0.38.

GILD
0.38
CMCSA
0.50
QCOM
0.53
ORCL
0.57
INTC
0.60
CSCO
0.61

Portfolio Correlations

Correlation vs. 失败案例, 2013-6. INTC has the highest portfolio correlation at 0.72, while GILD has the lowest at 0.54.

GILD
0.54
CMCSA
0.55
ORCL
0.68
QCOM
0.68
CSCO
0.72
INTC
0.72

Asset Correlations Table

The table below displays the correlation coefficients between the individual components of the portfolio, the entire portfolio, and the chosen benchmark.

The correlation results are calculated based on daily price changes starting from Jan 22, 1992
Diversification Analysis

Find what 失败案例, 2013-6 is missing

See which holdings overlap, where 失败案例, 2013-6 is concentrated, and which low-correlation assets could fill the gaps.

Analyze Diversification