PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
2FB.L vs. 3BAB.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

2FB.L vs. 3BAB.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Leverage Shares 2x Facebook ETC A GBP (2FB.L) and Leverage Shares 3x Alibaba ETC (3BAB.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, 2FB.L achieves a -37.06% return, which is significantly higher than 3BAB.L's -79.03% return.


2FB.L

1D
-4.35%
1M
-17.47%
YTD
-37.06%
6M
-36.55%
1Y
-50.20%
3Y*
24.62%
5Y*
-6.69%
10Y*

3BAB.L

1D
-16.86%
1M
-59.50%
YTD
-79.03%
6M
-80.77%
1Y
-70.50%
3Y*
-41.42%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

2FB.L vs. 3BAB.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
2FB.L
Leverage Shares 2x Facebook ETC A GBP
-37.06%-8.57%128.56%83.41%
3BAB.L
Leverage Shares 3x Alibaba ETC
-79.03%109.01%-18.41%-40.40%

Correlation

The correlation between 2FB.L and 3BAB.L is 0.19, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.19

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

0.19

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 24, 2023

0.19

2FB.L vs. 3BAB.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
2FB.L
3BAB.L

Communication Services

100.0%

-

Basic Materials

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

100.0%

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

-

Financial Services

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Industrials

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Technology

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Communication Services

2FB.L
100.0%
3BAB.L

-

Basic Materials

2FB.L

-

3BAB.L

-

Consumer Cyclical

2FB.L

-

3BAB.L
100.0%

Consumer Defensive

2FB.L

-

3BAB.L

-

Energy

2FB.L

-

3BAB.L

-

Financial Services

2FB.L

-

3BAB.L

-

Healthcare

2FB.L

-

3BAB.L

-

Industrials

2FB.L

-

3BAB.L

-

Real Estate

2FB.L

-

3BAB.L

-

Technology

2FB.L

-

3BAB.L

-

Utilities

2FB.L

-

3BAB.L

-

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

2FB.L vs. 3BAB.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

2FB.L
2FB.L Risk / Return Rank: 33
Overall Rank
2FB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
Sharpe Ratio Rank
2FB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
Sortino Ratio Rank
2FB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 44
Omega Ratio Rank
2FB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
Calmar Ratio Rank
2FB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 22
Martin Ratio Rank

3BAB.L
3BAB.L Risk / Return Rank: 44
Overall Rank
3BAB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
Sharpe Ratio Rank
3BAB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
Sortino Ratio Rank
3BAB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 66
Omega Ratio Rank
3BAB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
Calmar Ratio Rank
3BAB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 33
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.

2FB.L vs. 3BAB.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Leverage Shares 2x Facebook ETC A GBP (2FB.L) and Leverage Shares 3x Alibaba ETC (3BAB.L). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

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.


2FB.L3BAB.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.17

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.41

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.88

0.94

-0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.83

-0.77

-0.06

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-1.42

-1.31

-0.11

2FB.L vs. 3BAB.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current 2FB.L Sharpe Ratio is -0.73, which is lower than the 3BAB.L Sharpe Ratio of -0.56. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of 2FB.L and 3BAB.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

2FB.L vs. 3BAB.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum 2FB.L drawdown since its inception was -96.13%, roughly equal to the maximum 3BAB.L drawdown of -91.79%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for 2FB.L and 3BAB.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


2FB.L3BAB.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-96.13%

-91.79%

-4.34%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-60.32%

-91.79%

+31.47%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-63.66%

-91.79%

+28.13%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-96.13%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-62.03%

-91.79%

+29.76%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-41.71%

-54.16%

+12.45%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

35.33%

53.98%

-18.65%

Volatility

2FB.L vs. 3BAB.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Leverage Shares 2x Facebook ETC A GBP (2FB.L) is 21.64%, while Leverage Shares 3x Alibaba ETC (3BAB.L) has a volatility of 36.71%. This indicates that 2FB.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than 3BAB.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


2FB.L3BAB.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

21.64%

36.71%

-15.07%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

53.17%

91.03%

-37.86%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

68.56%

126.64%

-58.08%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

84.15%

126.61%

-42.46%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

78.73%

126.61%

-47.88%

2FB.L vs. 3BAB.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both 2FB.L and 3BAB.L have an expense ratio of 0.75%.


Dividends

2FB.L vs. 3BAB.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither 2FB.L nor 3BAB.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


2FB.L and 3BAB.L have a correlation of 0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Both ETFs have the same 0.75% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

2FB.L and 3BAB.L have the same expense ratio: 0.75% per year.

2FB.L tracks NYSE Leveraged 2x FB Index, while 3BAB.L tracks iSTOXX Leveraged 3x BABA Index.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for 2FB.L and 3BAB.L

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer