Rolling Returns
Neuland Laboratories Ltd.
Every 15-year stretch NEULANDLAB has been through — 35 of them, each starting a month after the last. The median returned 39.1% a year, the worst 28.9%, the best 46.9%. A single headline CAGR hides all of that.
Every Holding Period
A rolling window is every possible start date, not one. A five-year window starting in January is a different investment from one starting in February, and over twenty years there are a couple of hundred of them. What follows is the full spread of what each holding period actually produced.
Across 203 separate 1-year holding periods, the median returned 36.9% a year. The worst lost 54.8% a year and the best made 639.6%.
Worst start: June 2017 — -54.8% a year for the 1 years that followed.
Best start: March 2020 — 639.6% a year.
Against the Nifty 50: NEULANDLAB came out ahead in 63.0% of the 203 windows both series cover.
Across 179 separate 3-year holding periods, the median returned 44.6% a year. The worst lost 42.5% a year and the best made 127.9%.
Worst start: March 2017 — -42.5% a year for the 3 years that followed.
Best start: March 2022 — 127.9% a year.
Against the Nifty 50: NEULANDLAB came out ahead in 75.4% of the 179 windows both series cover.
Across 155 separate 5-year holding periods, the median returned 36.6% a year. The worst lost 7.0% a year and the best made 112.4%.
Worst start: March 2017 — -7.0% a year for the 5 years that followed.
Best start: March 2020 — 112.4% a year.
Against the Nifty 50: NEULANDLAB came out ahead in 80.0% of the 155 windows both series cover.
Across 131 separate 7-year holding periods, the median returned 33.9% a year. Not one of them ended in a loss — the weakest still compounded at 6.3% a year.
Worst start: September 2015 — 6.3% a year for the 7 years that followed.
Best start: August 2019 — 75.5% a year.
Against the Nifty 50: NEULANDLAB came out ahead in 96.2% of the 131 windows both series cover.
Across 95 separate 10-year holding periods, the median returned 34.5% a year. Not one of them ended in a loss — the weakest still compounded at 13.3% a year.
Worst start: March 2010 — 13.3% a year for the 10 years that followed.
Best start: November 2014 — 44.4% a year.
Against the Nifty 50: NEULANDLAB came out ahead in 100.0% of the 95 windows both series cover.
Across 35 separate 15-year holding periods, the median returned 39.1% a year. Not one of them ended in a loss — the weakest still compounded at 28.9% a year.
Worst start: October 2008 — 28.9% a year for the 15 years that followed.
Best start: August 2011 — 46.9% a year.
Against the Nifty 50: NEULANDLAB came out ahead in 100.0% of the 35 windows both series cover.
Windows step forward one month at a time and are measured on month-end adjusted closing prices, so dividends are treated as reinvested. Overlapping windows share months by construction — that is what makes the spread a description of this stock's history rather than a sample of independent trials.
Against The Index
Beating an index once is a result. Beating it across most of the periods an investor could have picked is a pattern. Over 15-year windows, NEULANDLAB finished ahead of the Nifty 50 in 100.0% of the 35 periods both series cover.
1-year windows
Ahead in 63.0% of 203 periods.
3-year windows
Ahead in 75.4% of 179 periods.
5-year windows
Ahead in 80.0% of 155 periods.
7-year windows
Ahead in 96.2% of 131 periods.
10-year windows
Ahead in 100.0% of 95 periods.
15-year windows
Ahead in 100.0% of 35 periods.
Each window is compared against the index over the identical calendar months, on the same adjusted basis — not against an assumed rate of return.
How This Is Calculated
Windows step forward one month at a time, so they share most of their months with each other. That is what makes this a description of NEULANDLAB's actual history rather than a set of independent trials — and why the spread should not be read as a probability.
Measured on month-end closing prices adjusted for dividends and splits, so dividends count as reinvested. A window that opened or closed mid-month would differ a little in either direction.
NEULANDLABis in today's Nifty 500 universe. Companies that delisted or collapsed are not on this site at all, so the worst outcome shown here is the worst among the survivors.
Measured on data to 2026-08-31, from 2008-10-01. Full definitions are on our methodology page.
HELP CENTER
Everything you need to know about this page and the data presented.
Over 15 years, Neuland Laboratories Ltd. has been through 35 separate 15 years holding periods — one starting every month. The median returned 39.1% a year, the worst 28.9% and the best 46.9%. A rolling return measures every possible start date instead of one, which is why it answers a question a single headline CAGR cannot: how much the outcome depended on when you happened to buy.
No — not in any of the 95 10 years periods the record covers. The weakest of them still compounded at 13.3% a year. That is a statement about the past, not a guarantee about any future 10 years, and it is measured only over the years Neuland Laboratories Ltd. has been listed.
-7.0% a year, for the five years beginning March 2017. For contrast the best 5 years returned 112.4% a year, starting March 2020, and the median across all 155 periods was 36.6%. The gap between those two numbers is the part of the outcome that came down to timing rather than to the company.
On this record, yes. 1 year outcomes ranged from -54.8% to 639.6% a year — a spread of 694.4%. 15 years outcomes ranged from 28.9% to 46.9%, a spread of 18.0%. Longer holding periods narrowed the range of results, which is the usual pattern and the reason this page publishes every window rather than one. Narrowing the range is not the same as removing the risk.
In 100.0% of the 35 15 years periods both series cover. Each window is compared against the index over the identical months, not against an assumed index return, so the comparison is a like-for-like record rather than a model.
Windows step forward one month at a time on month-end closing prices adjusted for dividends and stock splits, so dividends are treated as reinvested. A window length is only published once there are at least twelve complete windows behind it — fewer than that describes an anecdote, not a distribution. Overlapping windows share months by construction, which is what makes this a description of the actual history of Neuland Laboratories Ltd. rather than a sample of independent trials. Companies that delisted are not on this site at all, a survivorship bias worth holding in mind.
That is not a question this page answers, and we do not make recommendations. What it can show you is the full range of what every holding period in the listed history of Neuland Laboratories Ltd. actually produced — including the worst ones, which most performance figures leave out. Those are records of what happened, not forecasts. A stock that never had a losing decade may still have one, and holding a single company is a materially different risk from holding an index.
Explore Further
NEULANDLAB drawdowns and all-time high
The worst fall on record, how long recovery took, and how far the price sits below its peak.
NEULANDLAB SIP returns
What a monthly investment would have produced, backtested rather than assumed.
NEULANDLAB overview
Price history, wealth journey and how it compares with the index.
Rolling returns for every stock
Run the same question against any company we track.
ReturnScreener is an educational research platform and is not a SEBI-registered investment adviser. Everything on this page is a record of what historical prices did, not a projection and not a recommendation. Past performance does not guarantee future returns. See our methodology and disclaimer.