PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
2MSF.L vs. 3BID.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

2MSF.L vs. 3BID.L - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, 2MSF.L achieves a -27.61% return, which is significantly higher than 3BID.L's -29.92% return.


2MSF.L

1D
2.03%
1M
9.24%
YTD
-27.61%
6M
-26.03%
1Y
-25.08%
3Y*
0.32%
5Y*
10.56%
10Y*

3BID.L

1D
-5.04%
1M
4.03%
YTD
-29.92%
6M
-6.51%
1Y
63.77%
3Y*
-52.39%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
2MSF.L
Leverage Shares 2x Microsoft ETC A GBP
-27.61%4.50%17.75%106.56%-51.52%72.67%
3BID.L
Leverage Shares 3x Baidu ETC GBP
-29.92%54.89%-80.82%-49.94%-88.69%-61.82%

Correlation

The correlation between 2MSF.L and 3BID.L is 0.13, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.13

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

0.14

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 17, 2021

0.18

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


Sectors
2MSF.L
3BID.L

Technology

100.0%

-

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

100.0%

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

-

Financial Services

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Industrials

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Technology

2MSF.L
100.0%
3BID.L

-

Basic Materials

2MSF.L

-

3BID.L

-

Communication Services

2MSF.L

-

3BID.L
100.0%

Consumer Cyclical

2MSF.L

-

3BID.L

-

Consumer Defensive

2MSF.L

-

3BID.L

-

Energy

2MSF.L

-

3BID.L

-

Financial Services

2MSF.L

-

3BID.L

-

Healthcare

2MSF.L

-

3BID.L

-

Industrials

2MSF.L

-

3BID.L

-

Real Estate

2MSF.L

-

3BID.L

-

Utilities

2MSF.L

-

3BID.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

2MSF.L vs. 3BID.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

2MSF.L
2MSF.L Risk / Return Rank: 66
Overall Rank
2MSF.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
Sharpe Ratio Rank
2MSF.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
Sortino Ratio Rank
2MSF.L Omega Ratio Rank: 77
Omega Ratio Rank
2MSF.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
Calmar Ratio Rank
2MSF.L Martin Ratio Rank: 66
Martin Ratio Rank

3BID.L
3BID.L Risk / Return Rank: 2323
Overall Rank
3BID.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1616
Sharpe Ratio Rank
3BID.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3232
Sortino Ratio Rank
3BID.L Omega Ratio Rank: 2929
Omega Ratio Rank
3BID.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 2020
Calmar Ratio Rank
3BID.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1616
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.

2MSF.L vs. 3BID.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Leverage Shares 2x Microsoft ETC A GBP (2MSF.L) and Leverage Shares 3x Baidu ETC GBP (3BID.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.


2MSF.L3BID.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.83

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.83

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.98

1.19

-0.21

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.37

0.85

-1.23

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-0.63

1.49

-2.12

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

The current 2MSF.L Sharpe Ratio is -0.38, which is lower than the 3BID.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.46. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of 2MSF.L and 3BID.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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


2MSF.L3BID.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.38

0.46

-0.83

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.20

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.55

-0.45

+1.00

Drawdowns

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

The maximum 2MSF.L drawdown since its inception was -66.77%, smaller than the maximum 3BID.L drawdown of -99.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for 2MSF.L and 3BID.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


2MSF.L3BID.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-66.77%

-99.84%

+33.07%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-66.77%

-74.41%

+7.64%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-66.77%

-96.25%

+29.48%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-66.77%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-54.46%

-99.68%

+45.22%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-18.72%

-91.43%

+72.71%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

39.60%

42.73%

-3.13%

Volatility

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

The current volatility for Leverage Shares 2x Microsoft ETC A GBP (2MSF.L) is 20.94%, while Leverage Shares 3x Baidu ETC GBP (3BID.L) has a volatility of 55.32%. This indicates that 2MSF.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than 3BID.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


2MSF.L3BID.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

20.94%

55.32%

-34.38%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

48.79%

100.16%

-51.37%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

66.44%

139.35%

-72.91%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

53.38%

147.39%

-94.01%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

52.69%

147.39%

-94.70%

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

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


Dividends

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

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


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


2MSF.L and 3BID.L have a correlation of 0.13, 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.

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

2MSF.L tracks NYSE Leveraged 2x MSFT Index, while 3BID.L tracks Solactive Leveraged 3x BIDU Index.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for 2MSF.L and 3BID.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