PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
AFLG vs. QCLN
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

AFLG vs. QCLN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Active Factor Large Cap ETF (AFLG) and First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AFLG achieves a 12.78% return, which is significantly lower than QCLN's 52.00% return.


AFLG

1D
0.36%
1M
3.43%
YTD
12.78%
6M
12.48%
1Y
25.69%
3Y*
23.05%
5Y*
12.99%
10Y*

QCLN

1D
-0.62%
1M
13.54%
YTD
52.00%
6M
46.53%
1Y
117.87%
3Y*
12.00%
5Y*
2.04%
10Y*
17.14%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AFLG vs. QCLN - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
AFLG
First Trust Active Factor Large Cap ETF
12.78%14.23%27.02%20.10%-16.41%27.29%10.31%2.77%
QCLN
First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund
52.00%31.81%-18.86%-10.02%-30.37%-3.21%184.00%8.49%

Correlation

The correlation between AFLG and QCLN is 0.65, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


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

0.65

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

0.64

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.66

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 5, 2019

0.66

The correlation between AFLG and QCLN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.64 to 0.66 - a consistent structural relationship.

AFLG vs. QCLN - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
AFLG
QCLN

Technology

33.6%
20.8%

Consumer Cyclical

10.2%
9.4%

Communication Services

10.1%

-

Financial Services

10.0%
1.9%

Industrials

9.4%
30.2%

Healthcare

7.8%

-

Consumer Defensive

4.2%

-

Utilities

4.1%
13.2%

Real Estate

3.8%

-

Basic Materials

3.6%
9.4%

Energy

3.2%
13.2%

Technology

AFLG
33.6%
QCLN
20.8%

Consumer Cyclical

AFLG
10.2%
QCLN
9.4%

Communication Services

AFLG
10.1%
QCLN

-

Financial Services

AFLG
10.0%
QCLN
1.9%

Industrials

AFLG
9.4%
QCLN
30.2%

Healthcare

AFLG
7.8%
QCLN

-

Consumer Defensive

AFLG
4.2%
QCLN

-

Utilities

AFLG
4.1%
QCLN
13.2%

Real Estate

AFLG
3.8%
QCLN

-

Basic Materials

AFLG
3.6%
QCLN
9.4%

Energy

AFLG
3.2%
QCLN
13.2%

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

AFLG vs. QCLN — Risk / Return Rank

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

AFLG
AFLG Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
AFLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7070
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AFLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 7070
Sortino Ratio Rank
AFLG Omega Ratio Rank: 6969
Omega Ratio Rank
AFLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 6464
Calmar Ratio Rank
AFLG Martin Ratio Rank: 7676
Martin Ratio Rank

QCLN
QCLN Risk / Return Rank: 8989
Overall Rank
QCLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9393
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QCLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 8686
Sortino Ratio Rank
QCLN Omega Ratio Rank: 8080
Omega Ratio Rank
QCLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
QCLN Martin Ratio Rank: 9393
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.

AFLG vs. QCLN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Active Factor Large Cap ETF (AFLG) and First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN). 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.


AFLGQCLNDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.17

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.66

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.40

1.47

-0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.15

7.48

-4.33

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.43

25.77

-11.34

AFLG vs. QCLN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AFLG Sharpe Ratio is 2.25, which is lower than the QCLN Sharpe Ratio of 3.42. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AFLG and QCLN, 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


AFLGQCLNDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.25

3.42

-1.17

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.83

0.05

+0.77

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.49

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.74

0.20

+0.54

Drawdowns

AFLG vs. QCLN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AFLG drawdown since its inception was -35.84%, smaller than the maximum QCLN drawdown of -76.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AFLG and QCLN.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


AFLGQCLNDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-35.84%

-76.18%

+40.34%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.19%

-15.86%

+7.67%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.49%

-56.08%

+38.59%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-23.48%

-69.49%

+46.01%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-71.73%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.17%

-21.47%

+21.30%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.71%

-43.44%

+37.73%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.78%

4.59%

-2.81%

Volatility

AFLG vs. QCLN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust Active Factor Large Cap ETF (AFLG) is 2.77%, while First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN) has a volatility of 12.57%. This indicates that AFLG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QCLN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


AFLGQCLNDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.77%

12.57%

-9.80%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.81%

26.03%

-17.22%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.47%

34.68%

-23.21%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.82%

37.96%

-22.14%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.19%

34.90%

-15.71%

AFLG vs. QCLN - Expense Ratio Comparison

AFLG has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is lower than QCLN's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

AFLG vs. QCLN - Dividend Comparison

AFLG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.70%, more than QCLN's 0.15% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
AFLG
First Trust Active Factor Large Cap ETF
0.70%0.84%0.53%1.53%1.52%0.93%1.28%0.20%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
QCLN
First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund
0.15%0.25%0.87%0.76%0.33%0.01%0.30%0.85%1.03%0.45%1.24%0.72%

Frequently Asked Questions


AFLG and QCLN have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QCLN has higher volatility (12.57%) compared to AFLG (2.77%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AFLG dropped -35.84% vs QCLN's -76.18%.

On 5-year performance, AFLG leads with 12.99% vs 2.04% for QCLN. On fees, AFLG is cheaper at 0.55% per year. On volatility, AFLG has been the lower-risk option at 2.77%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, AFLG has performed better with a 12.99% return vs 2.04%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

AFLG is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for QCLN.

AFLG has the higher dividend yield at 0.70%, compared with 0.15% for QCLN.

AFLG is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while QCLN is Alternative Energy Equities. AFLG tracks Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity Index, while QCLN tracks NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for AFLG and 0.60% for QCLN.

QCLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.42 vs 2.25), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for AFLG and QCLN

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