PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
3GDE.L vs. 2FB.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

3GDE.L vs. 2FB.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a €10,000 investment in Leverage Shares 3x Long Gold Miners ETC EUR (3GDE.L) and Leverage Shares 2x Facebook ETC A GBP (2FB.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, 3GDE.L achieves a -61.40% return, which is significantly lower than 2FB.L's -36.21% return.


3GDE.L

1D
0.00%
1M
-41.13%
YTD
-61.40%
6M
-66.60%
1Y
29.50%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

2FB.L

1D
-4.22%
1M
-17.14%
YTD
-36.21%
6M
-35.74%
1Y
-50.68%
3Y*
24.45%
5Y*
-6.71%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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


2026 (YTD)20252024
3GDE.L
Leverage Shares 3x Long Gold Miners ETC EUR
-61.40%690.23%-18.68%
2FB.L
Leverage Shares 2x Facebook ETC A GBP
-36.21%-13.34%22.85%

Correlation

The correlation between 3GDE.L and 2FB.L is 0.19, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.19

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 16, 2024

0.13

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

3GDE.L vs. 2FB.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

3GDE.L
3GDE.L Risk / Return Rank: 1717
Overall Rank
3GDE.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1212
Sharpe Ratio Rank
3GDE.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2424
Sortino Ratio Rank
3GDE.L Omega Ratio Rank: 2424
Omega Ratio Rank
3GDE.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1313
Calmar Ratio Rank
3GDE.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1212
Martin Ratio Rank

2FB.L
2FB.L Risk / Return Rank: 33
Overall Rank
2FB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
Sharpe Ratio Rank
2FB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
Sortino Ratio Rank
2FB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 44
Omega Ratio Rank
2FB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
Calmar Ratio Rank
2FB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 22
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.

3GDE.L vs. 2FB.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Leverage Shares 3x Long Gold Miners ETC EUR (3GDE.L) and Leverage Shares 2x Facebook ETC A GBP (2FB.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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


3GDE.L2FB.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.95

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.24

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.16

0.88

+0.28

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.37

-0.84

+1.20

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.77

-1.42

+2.19

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

The current 3GDE.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.21, which is higher than the 2FB.L Sharpe Ratio of -0.74. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of 3GDE.L and 2FB.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...

Drawdowns

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

The maximum 3GDE.L drawdown since its inception was -81.14%, smaller than the maximum 2FB.L drawdown of -96.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for 3GDE.L and 2FB.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


3GDE.L2FB.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-81.14%

-96.20%

+15.06%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-81.14%

-60.51%

-20.63%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-65.25%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-96.20%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-81.14%

-63.39%

-17.75%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-24.78%

-41.84%

+17.06%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

38.42%

35.67%

+2.75%

Volatility

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

Leverage Shares 3x Long Gold Miners ETC EUR (3GDE.L) has a higher volatility of 55.92% compared to Leverage Shares 2x Facebook ETC A GBP (2FB.L) at 21.42%. This indicates that 3GDE.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than 2FB.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


3GDE.L2FB.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

55.92%

21.42%

+34.50%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

116.83%

53.05%

+63.78%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

140.02%

68.51%

+71.51%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

118.89%

84.37%

+34.52%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

118.89%

79.10%

+39.79%

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

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


Dividends

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

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


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


3GDE.L and 2FB.L have a correlation of 0.19, 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.

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

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for 3GDE.L and 2FB.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