PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
3MSE.L vs. 3NIE.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

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

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

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, 3MSE.L achieves a -43.10% return, which is significantly lower than 3NIE.L's -28.61% return.


3MSE.L

1D
1.70%
1M
11.46%
YTD
-43.10%
6M
-41.34%
1Y
-44.84%
3Y*
-9.58%
5Y*
2.59%
10Y*

3NIE.L

1D
-2.18%
1M
-22.06%
YTD
-28.61%
6M
-14.06%
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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


2026 (YTD)2025
3MSE.L
Leverage Shares 3x Microsoft ETP EUR
-43.10%5.37%
3NIE.L
Leverage Shares 3x Long NIO ETP Securities
-28.61%-22.42%

Correlation

The correlation between 3MSE.L and 3NIE.L is 0.02, 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

0.02

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

3MSE.L vs. 3NIE.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

3MSE.L
3MSE.L Risk / Return Rank: 55
Overall Rank
3MSE.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
Sharpe Ratio Rank
3MSE.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
Sortino Ratio Rank
3MSE.L Omega Ratio Rank: 55
Omega Ratio Rank
3MSE.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
Calmar Ratio Rank
3MSE.L Martin Ratio Rank: 44
Martin Ratio Rank

3NIE.L
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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Leverage Shares 3x Microsoft ETP EUR (3MSE.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.


3MSE.L3NIE.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.94

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.59

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-1.02

3MSE.L vs. 3NIE.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


3MSE.L3NIE.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.56

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.03

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.03

-0.39

+0.42

Drawdowns

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

The maximum 3MSE.L drawdown since its inception was -82.27%, which is greater than 3NIE.L's maximum drawdown of -60.70%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for 3MSE.L and 3NIE.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


3MSE.L3NIE.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-82.27%

-60.70%

-21.57%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-76.12%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-76.12%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-82.27%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-62.77%

-49.18%

-13.59%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-37.79%

-36.51%

-1.28%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

43.75%

Volatility

3MSE.L vs. 3NIE.L - Volatility Comparison


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


3MSE.L3NIE.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

30.73%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

75.06%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

79.14%

174.81%

-95.67%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

78.61%

174.81%

-96.20%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

80.17%

174.81%

-94.64%

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

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


Dividends

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

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


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


3MSE.L and 3NIE.L have a correlation of 0.02, 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.

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

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

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for 3MSE.L and 3NIE.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