2FB.L vs. 3MSE.L
2FB.L (Leverage Shares 2x Facebook ETC A GBP) and 3MSE.L (Leverage Shares 3x Microsoft ETP EUR) are both Leveraged Equities funds from Leverage Shares - 2FB.L tracks the NYSE Leveraged 2x FB Index while 3MSE.L tracks the iSTOXX Leveraged 3X MSFT Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, 2FB.L returned -6.69%/yr vs -10.24%/yr for 3MSE.L. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.75% expense ratio.
Performance
2FB.L vs. 3MSE.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
2FB.L is traded in GBp, while 3MSE.L is traded in EUR. To make them comparable, the 3MSE.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, 2FB.L achieves a -37.06% return, which is significantly higher than 3MSE.L's -62.80% 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*
- —
3MSE.L
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- -28.46%
- YTD
- -62.80%
- 6M
- -62.72%
- 1Y
- -68.12%
- 3Y*
- -18.63%
- 5Y*
- -10.24%
- 10Y*
- —
2FB.L vs. 3MSE.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2FB.L Leverage Shares 2x Facebook ETC A GBP | -37.06% | -8.57% | 128.56% | 597.14% | -92.16% | 43.03% | 16.55% |
3MSE.L Leverage Shares 3x Microsoft ETP EUR | -62.80% | -1.06% | 15.49% | 169.97% | -75.13% | 217.45% | 35.94% |
Correlation
The correlation between 2FB.L and 3MSE.L is 0.45, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.45 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.57 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.57 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2020 | 0.58 |
The correlation between 2FB.L and 3MSE.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.45 (1 year) to 0.58 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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. 3MSE.L — Risk / Return Rank
2FB.L
3MSE.L
2FB.L vs. 3MSE.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 Microsoft ETP EUR (3MSE.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.L | 3MSE.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.09 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.28 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.88 | 0.84 | +0.04 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.83 | -0.89 | +0.06 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.42 | -1.44 | +0.02 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
2FB.L vs. 3MSE.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum 2FB.L drawdown since its inception was -96.13%, which is greater than 3MSE.L's maximum drawdown of -81.40%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for 2FB.L and 3MSE.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| 2FB.L | 3MSE.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -96.13% | -81.40% | -14.73% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -60.32% | -76.64% | +16.32% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -63.66% | -76.64% | +12.98% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -96.13% | -81.40% | -14.73% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -62.03% | -75.82% | +13.79% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -41.71% | -35.65% | -6.06% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 35.33% | 47.24% | -11.91% |
Volatility
2FB.L vs. 3MSE.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Leverage Shares 2x Facebook ETC A GBP (2FB.L) is 21.64%, while Leverage Shares 3x Microsoft ETP EUR (3MSE.L) has a volatility of 32.60%. This indicates that 2FB.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than 3MSE.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| 2FB.L | 3MSE.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 21.64% | 32.60% | -10.96% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 53.17% | 76.19% | -23.02% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 68.56% | 83.26% | -14.70% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 84.15% | 76.51% | +7.64% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 78.73% | 76.15% | +2.58% |
2FB.L vs. 3MSE.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both 2FB.L and 3MSE.L have an expense ratio of 0.75%.
Dividends
2FB.L vs. 3MSE.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither 2FB.L nor 3MSE.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
2FB.L and 3MSE.L have a correlation of 0.45, 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 3MSE.L have the same expense ratio: 0.75% per year.
2FB.L tracks NYSE Leveraged 2x FB Index, while 3MSE.L tracks iSTOXX Leveraged 3X MSFT Index.
Find the right allocation for 2FB.L and 3MSE.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