3FB.L vs. 3NIE.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

3FB.L (Leverage Shares 3x Facebook ETC GBP) and 3NIE.L (Leverage Shares 3x Long NIO ETP Securities) are both Leveraged Equities funds from Leverage Shares - 3FB.L tracks the iSTOXX Leveraged 3X FB Index while 3NIE.L tracks the iSTOXX Leveraged 3x NIO Index. Both are passively managed. At a 0.10 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.75% expense ratio.

Performance

3FB.L vs. 3NIE.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Leverage Shares 3x Facebook ETC GBP (3FB.L) and Leverage Shares 3x Long NIO ETP Securities (3NIE.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, 3FB.L achieves a -32.02% return, which is significantly lower than 3NIE.L's -29.13% return.

3FB.L

• 1D: 11.21%
• 1M: 14.30%
• YTD: -32.02%
• 6M: -33.99%
• 1Y: -51.73%
• 3Y*: 32.30%
• 5Y*: -31.83%
• 10Y*: —

3NIE.L

• 1D: -2.04%
• 1M: -21.87%
• YTD: -29.13%
• 6M: -14.88%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

3FB.L vs. 3NIE.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
3FB.L Leverage Shares 3x Facebook ETC GBP	-32.02%	13.26%
3NIE.L Leverage Shares 3x Long NIO ETP Securities	-29.13%	-23.05%

Correlation

The correlation between 3FB.L and 3NIE.L is 0.10, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 26, 2025	0.10

3FB.L vs. 3NIE.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

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

Return for Risk

3FB.L vs. 3NIE.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

3FB.L

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

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.

3FB.L vs. 3NIE.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Leverage Shares 3x Facebook ETC GBP (3FB.L) and Leverage Shares 3x Long NIO ETP Securities (3NIE.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.

	3FB.L	3NIE.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.51	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.30	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.96	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.66	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.11	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	3FB.L	3NIE.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.51	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.25	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.22	-0.40	+0.18

Drawdowns

3FB.L vs. 3NIE.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum 3FB.L drawdown since its inception was -99.77%, which is greater than 3NIE.L's maximum drawdown of -60.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for 3FB.L and 3NIE.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	3FB.L	3NIE.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-99.77%	-60.99%	-38.78%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-78.00%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-82.94%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-99.77%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-90.96%	-49.47%	-41.49%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-74.45%	-36.88%	-37.57%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	46.72%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	3FB.L	3NIE.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	21.78%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	78.08%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	100.83%	175.06%	-74.23%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	126.34%	175.06%	-48.72%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	123.55%	175.06%	-51.51%

3FB.L vs. 3NIE.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

3FB.L vs. 3NIE.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither 3FB.L nor 3NIE.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

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

3FB.L and 3NIE.L have a correlation of 0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, 3FB.L or 3NIE.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, 3FB.L or 3NIE.L?

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

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

3FB.L tracks iSTOXX Leveraged 3X FB Index, while 3NIE.L tracks iSTOXX Leveraged 3x NIO Index.