3MSF.L vs. 3XLE.L
3MSF.L (Leverage Shares 3x Microsoft ETP GBP) and 3XLE.L (Leverage Shares 3x Long Oil & Gas ETP Securities GBP) are both Leveraged Equities funds from Leverage Shares. 3MSF.L is passively managed, while 3XLE.L is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, 3MSF.L returned -9.44%/yr vs 15.13%/yr for 3XLE.L. At a 0.02 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.75% expense ratio.
Performance
3MSF.L vs. 3XLE.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, 3MSF.L achieves a -45.14% return, which is significantly lower than 3XLE.L's 98.06% return.
3MSF.L
- 1D
- -11.81%
- 1M
- 6.51%
- YTD
- -45.14%
- 6M
- -44.62%
- 1Y
- -44.21%
- 3Y*
- -9.44%
- 5Y*
- 0.77%
- 10Y*
- —
3XLE.L
- 1D
- 6.81%
- 1M
- -1.92%
- YTD
- 98.06%
- 6M
- 87.16%
- 1Y
- 122.22%
- 3Y*
- 15.13%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
3MSF.L vs. 3XLE.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
3MSF.L Leverage Shares 3x Microsoft ETP GBP | -45.14% | -1.14% | 15.47% | 170.19% | -74.05% | 6.98% |
3XLE.L Leverage Shares 3x Long Oil & Gas ETP Securities GBP | 98.06% | -17.73% | -12.65% | -29.34% | 191.33% | -3.39% |
Correlation
The correlation between 3MSF.L and 3XLE.L is -0.09, 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 (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.09 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.04 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 17, 2021 | 0.02 |
The correlation between 3MSF.L and 3XLE.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.09 (1 year) to 0.02 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
3MSF.L vs. 3XLE.L — Risk / Return Rank
3MSF.L
3XLE.L
3MSF.L vs. 3XLE.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 3x Long Oil & Gas ETP Securities GBP (3XLE.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.
| 3MSF.L | 3XLE.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.31 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.45 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.96 | 1.29 | -0.33 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.56 | 3.10 | -3.65 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.93 | 8.55 | -9.47 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| 3MSF.L | 3XLE.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.50 | 1.82 | -2.31 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.01 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.13 | 0.34 | -0.21 |
Drawdowns
3MSF.L vs. 3XLE.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum 3MSF.L drawdown since its inception was -81.42%, which is greater than 3XLE.L's maximum drawdown of -74.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for 3MSF.L and 3XLE.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| 3MSF.L | 3XLE.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -81.42% | -74.89% | -6.53% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -79.39% | -39.26% | -40.13% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -79.39% | -66.05% | -13.34% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -81.42% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -68.80% | -31.69% | -37.11% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -36.10% | -45.07% | +8.97% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 47.63% | 14.25% | +33.38% |
Volatility
3MSF.L vs. 3XLE.L - Volatility Comparison
Leverage Shares 3x Microsoft ETP GBP (3MSF.L) has a higher volatility of 31.08% compared to Leverage Shares 3x Long Oil & Gas ETP Securities GBP (3XLE.L) at 25.62%. This indicates that 3MSF.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than 3XLE.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| 3MSF.L | 3XLE.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 31.08% | 25.62% | +5.46% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 75.06% | 57.75% | +17.31% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 88.42% | 67.19% | +21.23% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 80.52% | 82.23% | -1.71% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 80.24% | 82.23% | -1.99% |
3MSF.L vs. 3XLE.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both 3MSF.L and 3XLE.L have an expense ratio of 0.75%.
Dividends
3MSF.L vs. 3XLE.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither 3MSF.L nor 3XLE.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
3MSF.L and 3XLE.L have a correlation of -0.09, 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.
3MSF.L and 3XLE.L have the same expense ratio: 0.75% per year.
Find the right allocation for 3MSF.L and 3XLE.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