3MSF.L vs. 2FB.L

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

3MSF.L (Leverage Shares 3x Microsoft ETP GBP) and 2FB.L (Leverage Shares 2x Facebook ETC A GBP) are both Leveraged Equities funds from Leverage Shares - 3MSF.L tracks the iSTOXX Leveraged 3X MSFT Index while 2FB.L tracks the NYSE Leveraged 2x FB Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, 3MSF.L returned -13.18%/yr vs -6.69%/yr for 2FB.L. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.75% expense ratio.

Performance

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

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Leverage Shares 3x Microsoft ETP GBP (3MSF.L) and Leverage Shares 2x Facebook ETC A GBP (2FB.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, 3MSF.L achieves a -68.59% return, which is significantly lower than 2FB.L's -37.06% return.

3MSF.L

• 1D: -15.41%
• 1M: -39.71%
• YTD: -68.59%
• 6M: -68.50%
• 1Y: -73.04%
• 3Y*: -23.07%
• 5Y*: -13.18%
• 10Y*: —

2FB.L

• 1D: -4.35%
• 1M: -17.47%
• YTD: -37.06%
• 6M: -36.55%
• 1Y: -50.20%
• 3Y*: 24.62%
• 5Y*: -6.69%
• 10Y*: —

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

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
3MSF.L Leverage Shares 3x Microsoft ETP GBP	-68.59%	-1.14%	15.47%	170.19%	-74.05%	203.49%	36.73%
2FB.L Leverage Shares 2x Facebook ETC A GBP	-37.06%	-8.57%	128.56%	597.14%	-92.16%	43.03%	16.55%

Correlation

The correlation between 3MSF.L and 2FB.L is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.47
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.58
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.57
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2020	0.58

The correlation between 3MSF.L and 2FB.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.47 (1 year) to 0.58 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

3MSF.L vs. 2FB.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	3MSF.L	2FB.L
Technology	100.0%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	100.0%
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

3MSF.L vs. 2FB.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

3MSF.L

3MSF.L Risk / Return Rank: 2
3MSF.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3
3MSF.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
3MSF.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1
3MSF.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1
3MSF.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1

2FB.L

2FB.L Risk / Return Rank: 3
2FB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
2FB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
2FB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 4
2FB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
2FB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2

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.

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

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

	3MSF.L	2FB.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.88	-0.73	-0.15
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.45	-0.94	-0.51
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.81	0.88	-0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.92	-0.83	-0.09
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.55	-1.42	-0.13

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

The current 3MSF.L Sharpe Ratio is -0.88, which is comparable to the 2FB.L Sharpe Ratio of -0.73. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of 3MSF.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.

Drawdowns

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

The maximum 3MSF.L drawdown since its inception was -81.42%, smaller than the maximum 2FB.L drawdown of -96.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for 3MSF.L and 2FB.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	3MSF.L	2FB.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-81.42%	-96.13%	+14.71%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-79.25%	-60.32%	-18.93%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-79.25%	-63.66%	-15.59%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-81.42%	-96.13%	+14.71%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-79.25%	-62.03%	-17.22%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-35.62%	-41.71%	+6.09%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	47.01%	35.33%	+11.68%

Volatility

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

Leverage Shares 3x Microsoft ETP GBP (3MSF.L) has a higher volatility of 36.52% compared to Leverage Shares 2x Facebook ETC A GBP (2FB.L) at 21.64%. This indicates that 3MSF.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.

Volatility by Period

	3MSF.L	2FB.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	36.52%	21.64%	+14.88%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	78.12%	53.17%	+24.95%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	82.57%	68.56%	+14.01%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	78.33%	84.15%	-5.82%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	77.57%	78.73%	-1.16%

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

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

Dividends

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

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

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both 3MSF.L and 2FB.L in my portfolio?

3MSF.L and 2FB.L have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, 3MSF.L or 2FB.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, 3MSF.L or 2FB.L?

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

What is the main difference between 3MSF.L and 2FB.L?

3MSF.L tracks iSTOXX Leveraged 3X MSFT Index, while 2FB.L tracks NYSE Leveraged 2x FB Index.