PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
2MSF.L vs. AMD3.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

2MSF.L vs. AMD3.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 AMD ETP Securities (AMD3.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

2MSF.L is traded in GBp, while AMD3.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the AMD3.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, 2MSF.L achieves a -27.61% return, which is significantly lower than AMD3.L's 619.93% 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*

AMD3.L

1D
-6.29%
1M
179.78%
YTD
619.93%
6M
553.07%
1Y
2,204.56%
3Y*
50.71%
5Y*
10.26%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

2MSF.L vs. AMD3.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%85.74%
AMD3.L
Leverage Shares 3x AMD ETP Securities
619.93%53.44%-76.37%451.09%-97.25%379.40%

Correlation

The correlation between 2MSF.L and AMD3.L is 0.22, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.22

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

0.38

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.46

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 25, 2021

0.46

Over the past year, the correlation between 2MSF.L and AMD3.L has dropped to 0.22 - well below their long-term average of 0.46, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

2MSF.L vs. AMD3.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
2MSF.L
AMD3.L

Technology

100.0%
100.0%

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

-

Financial Services

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Industrials

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Technology

2MSF.L
100.0%
AMD3.L
100.0%

Basic Materials

2MSF.L

-

AMD3.L

-

Communication Services

2MSF.L

-

AMD3.L

-

Consumer Cyclical

2MSF.L

-

AMD3.L

-

Consumer Defensive

2MSF.L

-

AMD3.L

-

Energy

2MSF.L

-

AMD3.L

-

Financial Services

2MSF.L

-

AMD3.L

-

Healthcare

2MSF.L

-

AMD3.L

-

Industrials

2MSF.L

-

AMD3.L

-

Real Estate

2MSF.L

-

AMD3.L

-

Utilities

2MSF.L

-

AMD3.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. AMD3.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

AMD3.L
AMD3.L Risk / Return Rank: 9696
Overall Rank
AMD3.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100100
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AMD3.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9494
Sortino Ratio Rank
AMD3.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
AMD3.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9999
Calmar Ratio Rank
AMD3.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9898
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. AMD3.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 AMD ETP Securities (AMD3.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.LAMD3.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-11.88

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-4.85

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.98

1.60

-0.62

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.37

28.51

-28.89

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-0.63

52.65

-53.29

2MSF.L vs. AMD3.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current 2MSF.L Sharpe Ratio is -0.38, which is lower than the AMD3.L Sharpe Ratio of 11.51. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of 2MSF.L and AMD3.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.LAMD3.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.38

11.51

-11.88

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.20

0.07

+0.13

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.55

0.09

+0.46

Drawdowns

2MSF.L vs. AMD3.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum 2MSF.L drawdown since its inception was -66.77%, smaller than the maximum AMD3.L drawdown of -99.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for 2MSF.L and AMD3.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


2MSF.LAMD3.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-66.77%

-99.50%

+32.73%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-66.77%

-76.32%

+9.55%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-66.77%

-97.91%

+31.14%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-66.77%

-99.50%

+32.73%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-54.46%

-73.03%

+18.57%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-18.72%

-83.27%

+64.55%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

39.60%

41.41%

-1.81%

Volatility

2MSF.L vs. AMD3.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Leverage Shares 2x Microsoft ETC A GBP (2MSF.L) is 20.94%, while Leverage Shares 3x AMD ETP Securities (AMD3.L) has a volatility of 70.10%. This indicates that 2MSF.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AMD3.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


2MSF.LAMD3.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

20.94%

70.10%

-49.16%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

48.79%

134.33%

-85.54%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

66.44%

189.14%

-122.70%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

53.38%

156.27%

-102.89%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

52.69%

155.84%

-103.15%

2MSF.L vs. AMD3.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both 2MSF.L and AMD3.L have an expense ratio of 0.75%.


Dividends

2MSF.L vs. AMD3.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither 2MSF.L nor AMD3.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


2MSF.L and AMD3.L have a correlation of 0.22, 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 AMD3.L have the same expense ratio: 0.75% per year.

2MSF.L tracks NYSE Leveraged 2x MSFT Index, while AMD3.L tracks iSTOXX Leveraged 3x AMD Index.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for 2MSF.L and AMD3.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