PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
2MU.L vs. 3QQQ.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

2MU.L vs. 3QQQ.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Leverage Shares 2x Micron Technology ETC GBP (2MU.L) and Leverage Shares 3x Long US Tech 100 ETP Securities (3QQQ.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

2MU.L is traded in GBp, while 3QQQ.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the 3QQQ.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, 2MU.L achieves a 890.70% return, which is significantly higher than 3QQQ.L's 58.94% return.


2MU.L

1D
3.90%
1M
267.24%
YTD
890.70%
6M
1,363.92%
1Y
6,514.91%
3Y*
298.47%
5Y*
99.54%
10Y*

3QQQ.L

1D
0.04%
1M
35.02%
YTD
58.94%
6M
52.05%
1Y
127.83%
3Y*
54.29%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

2MU.L vs. 3QQQ.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
2MU.L
Leverage Shares 2x Micron Technology ETC GBP
890.70%550.25%-30.59%142.95%-55.69%
3QQQ.L
Leverage Shares 3x Long US Tech 100 ETP Securities
58.94%5.78%63.73%172.86%-55.10%

Correlation

The correlation between 2MU.L and 3QQQ.L is 0.57, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


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

0.57

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

0.54

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 7, 2022

0.55

The correlation between 2MU.L and 3QQQ.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.54 to 0.57 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

2MU.L vs. 3QQQ.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

2MU.L
2MU.L Risk / Return Rank: 9999
Overall Rank
2MU.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100100
Sharpe Ratio Rank
2MU.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9898
Sortino Ratio Rank
2MU.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9797
Omega Ratio Rank
2MU.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 100100
Calmar Ratio Rank
2MU.L Martin Ratio Rank: 100100
Martin Ratio Rank

3QQQ.L
3QQQ.L Risk / Return Rank: 5454
Overall Rank
3QQQ.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5858
Sharpe Ratio Rank
3QQQ.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5858
Sortino Ratio Rank
3QQQ.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6666
Omega Ratio Rank
3QQQ.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 5353
Calmar Ratio Rank
3QQQ.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3636
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.

2MU.L vs. 3QQQ.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Leverage Shares 2x Micron Technology ETC GBP (2MU.L) and Leverage Shares 3x Long US Tech 100 ETP Securities (3QQQ.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.


2MU.L3QQQ.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+48.32

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+4.83

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.95

1.41

+0.54

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

120.42

2.68

+117.74

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

429.29

5.58

+423.72

2MU.L vs. 3QQQ.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current 2MU.L Sharpe Ratio is 50.34, which is higher than the 3QQQ.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of 2MU.L and 3QQQ.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


2MU.L3QQQ.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

50.34

2.02

+48.32

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.95

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.99

0.57

+0.43

Drawdowns

2MU.L vs. 3QQQ.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum 2MU.L drawdown since its inception was -89.16%, which is greater than 3QQQ.L's maximum drawdown of -58.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for 2MU.L and 3QQQ.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


2MU.L3QQQ.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-89.16%

-58.71%

-30.45%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-53.20%

-47.38%

-5.82%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-89.16%

-58.71%

-30.45%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-89.16%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-44.86%

-20.55%

-24.31%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

14.95%

22.84%

-7.89%

Volatility

2MU.L vs. 3QQQ.L - Volatility Comparison

Leverage Shares 2x Micron Technology ETC GBP (2MU.L) has a higher volatility of 53.51% compared to Leverage Shares 3x Long US Tech 100 ETP Securities (3QQQ.L) at 14.23%. This indicates that 2MU.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than 3QQQ.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


2MU.L3QQQ.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

53.51%

14.23%

+39.28%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

96.13%

32.93%

+63.20%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

127.53%

63.14%

+64.39%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

104.70%

62.79%

+41.91%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

100.80%

62.79%

+38.01%

2MU.L vs. 3QQQ.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

2MU.L has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than 3QQQ.L's 0.01% expense ratio.


Dividends

2MU.L vs. 3QQQ.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither 2MU.L nor 3QQQ.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


2MU.L and 3QQQ.L have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, 3QQQ.L is cheaper at 0.01% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

3QQQ.L is cheaper with a 0.01% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for 2MU.L.

Their fees differ too: 0.75% for 2MU.L and 0.01% for 3QQQ.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for 2MU.L and 3QQQ.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