AUGM vs. QCLN

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

AUGM (FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - August) and QCLN (First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - AUGM is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by First Trust, while QCLN is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy. AUGM is actively managed, while QCLN is passively managed. Over the past year, AUGM returned 7.62% vs 120.21% for QCLN. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. AUGM charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for QCLN.

Performance

AUGM vs. QCLN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - August (AUGM) and First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AUGM achieves a 2.74% return, which is significantly lower than QCLN's 52.94% return.

AUGM

• 1D: -0.03%
• 1M: 0.85%
• YTD: 2.74%
• 6M: 3.18%
• 1Y: 7.62%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QCLN

• 1D: -0.41%
• 1M: 16.40%
• YTD: 52.94%
• 6M: 50.79%
• 1Y: 120.21%
• 3Y*: 12.03%
• 5Y*: 2.16%
• 10Y*: 17.39%

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

AUGM vs. QCLN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
AUGM FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - August	2.74%	6.81%	2.15%
QCLN First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund	52.94%	31.81%	-2.09%

Correlation

The correlation between AUGM and QCLN is 0.57, 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	0.57
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 20, 2024	0.58

The correlation between AUGM and QCLN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.57 to 0.58 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

AUGM vs. QCLN — Risk / Return Rank

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

AUGM

AUGM Risk / Return Rank: 93
AUGM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
AUGM Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
AUGM Omega Ratio Rank: 95
AUGM Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
AUGM Martin Ratio Rank: 94

QCLN

QCLN Risk / Return Rank: 89
QCLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
QCLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
QCLN Omega Ratio Rank: 79
QCLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
QCLN Martin Ratio Rank: 94

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.

AUGM vs. QCLN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - August (AUGM) 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.

	AUGM	QCLN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.37	3.49	-0.12
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	5.36	3.86	+1.51
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.75	1.48	+0.27
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.73	7.62	-2.89
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	26.17	26.28	-0.12
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

AUGM vs. QCLN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AUGM Sharpe Ratio is 3.37, which is comparable to the QCLN Sharpe Ratio of 3.49. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AUGM 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	AUGM	QCLN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.37	3.49	-0.12
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.06	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.50	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.87	0.20	+1.67

Drawdowns

AUGM vs. QCLN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AUGM drawdown since its inception was -4.27%, smaller than the maximum QCLN drawdown of -76.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AUGM and QCLN.

Drawdown Indicators

	AUGM	QCLN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-4.27%	-76.18%	+71.91%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.62%	-15.86%	+14.24%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-56.08%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-69.49%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-71.73%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.03%	-20.99%	+20.96%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.35%	-43.45%	+43.10%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.29%	4.59%	-4.30%

Volatility

AUGM vs. QCLN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - August (AUGM) is 0.26%, while First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN) has a volatility of 12.56%. This indicates that AUGM 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.

Volatility by Period

	AUGM	QCLN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.26%	12.56%	-12.30%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.73%	26.02%	-24.29%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.28%	34.88%	-32.60%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	3.55%	37.97%	-34.42%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3.55%	34.91%	-31.36%

AUGM vs. QCLN - Expense Ratio Comparison

AUGM has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than QCLN's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

AUGM vs. QCLN - Dividend Comparison

AUGM has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QCLN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.15%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
AUGM FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - August	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	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

Can I hold both AUGM and QCLN in my portfolio?

AUGM and QCLN have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AUGM or QCLN?

QCLN has higher volatility (12.56%) compared to AUGM (0.26%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AUGM dropped -4.27% vs QCLN's -76.18%.

Which ETF is better, AUGM or QCLN?

On 1-year performance, QCLN leads with 120.21% vs 7.62% for AUGM. On fees, QCLN is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, AUGM has been the lower-risk option at 0.26%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AUGM or QCLN?

Over the 1-year period, QCLN has performed better with a 120.21% return vs 7.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AUGM or QCLN?

QCLN is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for AUGM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AUGM or QCLN?

QCLN has the higher dividend yield at 0.15%, compared with 0.00% for AUGM.

What is the main difference between AUGM and QCLN?

AUGM is categorized as Defined Outcome, while QCLN is Alternative Energy Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for AUGM and 0.60% for QCLN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QCLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.49 vs 3.37), 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.