PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
3MSF.L vs. 5QQE.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

3MSF.L vs. 5QQE.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 5x Long Nasdaq 100 ETP Securities EUR (5QQE.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

3MSF.L is traded in GBp, while 5QQE.L is traded in EUR. To make them comparable, the 5QQE.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, 3MSF.L achieves a -43.87% return, which is significantly lower than 5QQE.L's 92.71% return.


3MSF.L

1D
2.31%
1M
9.51%
YTD
-43.87%
6M
-42.55%
1Y
-44.51%
3Y*
-9.61%
5Y*
1.23%
10Y*

5QQE.L

1D
-3.75%
1M
35.49%
YTD
92.71%
6M
75.45%
1Y
202.56%
3Y*
69.99%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

3MSF.L vs. 5QQE.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
3MSF.L
Leverage Shares 3x Microsoft ETP GBP
-43.87%-1.14%15.47%170.19%-74.05%6.50%
5QQE.L
Leverage Shares 5x Long Nasdaq 100 ETP Securities EUR
92.71%-4.80%76.92%400.57%-95.65%16.32%

Correlation

The correlation between 3MSF.L and 5QQE.L is 0.44, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.44

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.65

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 16, 2021

0.68

Over the past year, the correlation between 3MSF.L and 5QQE.L has dropped to 0.44 - well below their long-term average of 0.68, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

3MSF.L vs. 5QQE.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
3MSF.L
5QQE.L

Technology

100.0%
54.2%

Basic Materials

-

1.2%

Communication Services

-

15.5%

Consumer Cyclical

-

12.2%

Consumer Defensive

-

7.6%

Energy

-

0.6%

Financial Services

-

0.2%

Healthcare

-

4.2%

Industrials

-

2.8%

Real Estate

-

0.1%

Utilities

-

1.4%

Technology

3MSF.L
100.0%
5QQE.L
54.2%

Basic Materials

3MSF.L

-

5QQE.L
1.2%

Communication Services

3MSF.L

-

5QQE.L
15.5%

Consumer Cyclical

3MSF.L

-

5QQE.L
12.2%

Consumer Defensive

3MSF.L

-

5QQE.L
7.6%

Energy

3MSF.L

-

5QQE.L
0.6%

Financial Services

3MSF.L

-

5QQE.L
0.2%

Healthcare

3MSF.L

-

5QQE.L
4.2%

Industrials

3MSF.L

-

5QQE.L
2.8%

Real Estate

3MSF.L

-

5QQE.L
0.1%

Utilities

3MSF.L

-

5QQE.L
1.4%

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. 5QQE.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: 55
Overall Rank
3MSF.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
Sharpe Ratio Rank
3MSF.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
Sortino Ratio Rank
3MSF.L Omega Ratio Rank: 66
Omega Ratio Rank
3MSF.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
Calmar Ratio Rank
3MSF.L Martin Ratio Rank: 55
Martin Ratio Rank

5QQE.L
5QQE.L Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
5QQE.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
5QQE.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6262
Sortino Ratio Rank
5QQE.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5959
Omega Ratio Rank
5QQE.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7474
Calmar Ratio Rank
5QQE.L Martin Ratio Rank: 5757
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.

3MSF.L vs. 5QQE.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 5x Long Nasdaq 100 ETP Securities EUR (5QQE.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.L5QQE.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-3.25

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-3.17

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.96

1.36

-0.40

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.55

3.75

-4.29

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-0.91

10.06

-10.97

3MSF.L vs. 5QQE.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current 3MSF.L Sharpe Ratio is -0.49, which is lower than the 5QQE.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.76. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of 3MSF.L and 5QQE.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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


3MSF.L5QQE.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.49

2.76

-3.25

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.02

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.14

-0.04

+0.18

Drawdowns

3MSF.L vs. 5QQE.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum 3MSF.L drawdown since its inception was -81.42%, smaller than the maximum 5QQE.L drawdown of -95.85%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for 3MSF.L and 5QQE.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


3MSF.L5QQE.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-81.42%

-95.85%

+14.43%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-79.39%

-56.52%

-22.87%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-79.39%

-80.29%

+0.90%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-81.42%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-68.07%

-29.37%

-38.70%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-36.12%

-74.60%

+38.48%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

47.82%

21.10%

+26.72%

Volatility

3MSF.L vs. 5QQE.L - Volatility Comparison

Leverage Shares 3x Microsoft ETP GBP (3MSF.L) has a higher volatility of 31.04% compared to Leverage Shares 5x Long Nasdaq 100 ETP Securities EUR (5QQE.L) at 24.77%. This indicates that 3MSF.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than 5QQE.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


3MSF.L5QQE.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

31.04%

24.77%

+6.27%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

75.10%

56.52%

+18.58%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

88.44%

76.65%

+11.79%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

80.48%

107.79%

-27.31%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

80.21%

107.79%

-27.58%

3MSF.L vs. 5QQE.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both 3MSF.L and 5QQE.L have an expense ratio of 0.75%.


Dividends

3MSF.L vs. 5QQE.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither 3MSF.L nor 5QQE.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


3MSF.L and 5QQE.L have a correlation of 0.44, 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 5QQE.L have the same expense ratio: 0.75% per year.

3MSF.L is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while 5QQE.L is Nasdaq-100.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for 3MSF.L and 5QQE.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