PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
3TSM.L vs. HNSS.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility

Performance

3TSM.L vs. HNSS.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Leverage Shares 3x Long Taiwan Semiconductor (TSM) ETP Securities (3TSM.L) and HSBC Nasdaq Global Semiconductor UCITS ETF (HNSS.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

3TSM.L vs. HNSS.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
3TSM.L
Leverage Shares 3x Long Taiwan Semiconductor (TSM) ETP Securities
10.57%60.55%288.94%90.51%-85.32%
HNSS.L
HSBC Nasdaq Global Semiconductor UCITS ETF
7.06%56.48%17.97%69.39%-27.37%
Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, 3TSM.L achieves a 10.57% return, which is significantly higher than HNSS.L's 7.06% return.


3TSM.L

1D
7.87%
1M
-37.09%
YTD
10.57%
6M
26.08%
1Y
337.57%
3Y*
96.02%
5Y*
10Y*

HNSS.L

1D
0.70%
1M
-11.71%
YTD
7.06%
6M
25.76%
1Y
93.18%
3Y*
37.90%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


3TSM.L vs. HNSS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

3TSM.L has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than HNSS.L's 0.35% expense ratio.


Return for Risk

3TSM.L vs. HNSS.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

3TSM.L
3TSM.L Risk / Return Rank: 9595
Overall Rank
3TSM.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9898
Sharpe Ratio Rank
3TSM.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9494
Sortino Ratio Rank
3TSM.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8787
Omega Ratio Rank
3TSM.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9898
Calmar Ratio Rank
3TSM.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
Martin Ratio Rank

HNSS.L
HNSS.L Risk / Return Rank: 9696
Overall Rank
HNSS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9797
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HNSS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9696
Sortino Ratio Rank
HNSS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9393
Omega Ratio Rank
HNSS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9898
Calmar Ratio Rank
HNSS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9797
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.

3TSM.L vs. HNSS.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Leverage Shares 3x Long Taiwan Semiconductor (TSM) ETP Securities (3TSM.L) and HSBC Nasdaq Global Semiconductor UCITS ETF (HNSS.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.


3TSM.LHNSS.LDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

3.14

2.82

+0.32

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.01

3.32

-0.32

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.36

1.43

-0.07

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

6.49

5.57

+0.92

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

17.75

19.26

-1.51

3TSM.L vs. HNSS.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current 3TSM.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.14, which is comparable to the HNSS.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.82. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of 3TSM.L and HNSS.L, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.


Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


3TSM.LHNSS.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.14

2.82

+0.32

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.16

0.76

-0.60

Correlation

The correlation between 3TSM.L and HNSS.L is 0.76, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.


Dividends

3TSM.L vs. HNSS.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither 3TSM.L nor HNSS.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Drawdowns

3TSM.L vs. HNSS.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum 3TSM.L drawdown since its inception was -93.59%, which is greater than HNSS.L's maximum drawdown of -41.16%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for 3TSM.L and HNSS.L.


Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators


3TSM.LHNSS.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-93.59%

-36.83%

-56.76%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-46.56%

-14.21%

-32.35%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-42.36%

-12.85%

-29.51%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-57.40%

-9.88%

-47.52%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

17.03%

4.50%

+12.53%

Volatility

3TSM.L vs. HNSS.L - Volatility Comparison

Leverage Shares 3x Long Taiwan Semiconductor (TSM) ETP Securities (3TSM.L) has a higher volatility of 31.90% compared to HSBC Nasdaq Global Semiconductor UCITS ETF (HNSS.L) at 10.17%. This indicates that 3TSM.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than HNSS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period


3TSM.LHNSS.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

31.90%

10.17%

+21.73%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

74.07%

23.39%

+50.68%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

106.72%

32.89%

+73.83%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

113.58%

31.13%

+82.45%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

113.58%

31.13%

+82.45%