2FB.L vs. 3MSF.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

2FB.L (Leverage Shares 2x Facebook ETC A GBP) and 3MSF.L (Leverage Shares 3x Microsoft ETP GBP) are both Leveraged Equities funds from Leverage Shares - 2FB.L tracks the NYSE Leveraged 2x FB Index while 3MSF.L tracks the iSTOXX Leveraged 3X MSFT Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, 2FB.L returned 0.08%/yr vs 1.23%/yr for 3MSF.L. A 0.56 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.75% expense ratio.

Performance

2FB.L vs. 3MSF.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 Microsoft ETP GBP (3MSF.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, 2FB.L achieves a -16.41% return, which is significantly higher than 3MSF.L's -43.87% return.

2FB.L

• 1D: 7.11%
• 1M: 11.12%
• YTD: -16.41%
• 6M: -17.80%
• 1Y: -28.39%
• 3Y*: 38.40%
• 5Y*: 0.08%
• 10Y*: —

3MSF.L

• 1D: 2.31%
• 1M: 11.27%
• YTD: -43.87%
• 6M: -42.12%
• 1Y: -43.56%
• 3Y*: -9.61%
• 5Y*: 1.23%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
2FB.L Leverage Shares 2x Facebook ETC A GBP	-16.41%	-8.57%	128.56%	597.14%	-92.16%	43.03%	20.40%
3MSF.L Leverage Shares 3x Microsoft ETP GBP	-43.87%	-1.14%	15.47%	170.19%	-74.05%	203.49%	36.73%

Correlation

The correlation between 2FB.L and 3MSF.L is 0.41, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.41
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.56
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.56
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2020	0.56

The correlation between 2FB.L and 3MSF.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.41 (1 year) to 0.56 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

Sectors	2FB.L	3MSF.L
Communication Services	100.0%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	100.0%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

2FB.L vs. 3MSF.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: 6
2FB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
2FB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6
2FB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6
2FB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
2FB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 5

3MSF.L

3MSF.L Risk / Return Rank: 5
3MSF.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
3MSF.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6
3MSF.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6
3MSF.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
3MSF.L Martin Ratio Rank: 5

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. 3MSF.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 GBP (3MSF.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.

	2FB.L	3MSF.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.43	-0.49	+0.07
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.24	-0.26	+0.02
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.97	0.96	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.47	-0.55	+0.08
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.87	-0.91	+0.04
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

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

The current 2FB.L Sharpe Ratio is -0.43, which is comparable to the 3MSF.L Sharpe Ratio of -0.49. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of 2FB.L and 3MSF.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	2FB.L	3MSF.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.43	-0.49	+0.07
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.00	0.02	-0.01
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.08	0.14	-0.06

Drawdowns

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

The maximum 2FB.L drawdown since its inception was -96.13%, which is greater than 3MSF.L's maximum drawdown of -81.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for 2FB.L and 3MSF.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	2FB.L	3MSF.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-96.13%	-81.42%	-14.71%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-60.32%	-79.39%	+19.07%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-63.66%	-79.39%	+15.73%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-96.13%	-81.42%	-14.71%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-49.57%	-68.07%	+18.50%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-39.73%	-36.12%	-3.61%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	32.69%	47.82%	-15.13%

Volatility

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

The current volatility for Leverage Shares 2x Facebook ETC A GBP (2FB.L) is 15.00%, while Leverage Shares 3x Microsoft ETP GBP (3MSF.L) has a volatility of 31.04%. This indicates that 2FB.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than 3MSF.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	2FB.L	3MSF.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	15.00%	31.04%	-16.04%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	51.06%	75.10%	-24.04%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	66.69%	88.44%	-21.75%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	83.82%	80.48%	+3.34%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	78.67%	80.21%	-1.54%

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

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

Dividends

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

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

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both 2FB.L and 3MSF.L in my portfolio?

2FB.L and 3MSF.L have a correlation of 0.41, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, 2FB.L or 3MSF.L?

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

Which ETF is cheaper, 2FB.L or 3MSF.L?

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

What is the main difference between 2FB.L and 3MSF.L?

2FB.L tracks NYSE Leveraged 2x FB Index, while 3MSF.L tracks iSTOXX Leveraged 3X MSFT Index.