BFJL vs. QCLN
BFJL (FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - July) and QCLN (First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - BFJL is a Defined Outcome fund managed by First Trust, while QCLN is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy. At a 0.40 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BFJL charges 0.90%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for QCLN.
Performance
BFJL vs. QCLN - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BFJL achieves a -7.67% return, which is significantly lower than QCLN's 52.94% return.
BFJL
- 1D
- 0.09%
- 1M
- -1.12%
- YTD
- -7.67%
- 6M
- -10.43%
- 1Y
- —
- 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%
BFJL vs. QCLN - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
BFJL FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - July | -7.67% | -7.43% |
QCLN First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund | 52.94% | 36.27% |
Correlation
The correlation between BFJL and QCLN is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 2, 2025 | 0.40 |
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
BFJL vs. QCLN — Risk / Return Rank
BFJL
QCLN
BFJL vs. QCLN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - July (BFJL) 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.
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| BFJL | QCLN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | — | 3.49 | — |
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 | -1.14 | 0.20 | -1.34 |
Drawdowns
BFJL vs. QCLN - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BFJL drawdown since its inception was -21.27%, smaller than the maximum QCLN drawdown of -76.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BFJL and QCLN.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BFJL | QCLN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -21.27% | -76.18% | +54.91% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -15.86% | — |
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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -21.20% | -20.99% | -0.21% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -11.76% | -43.45% | +31.69% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 4.59% | — |
Volatility
BFJL vs. QCLN - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BFJL | QCLN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 12.56% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 26.02% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.76% | 34.88% | -21.12% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.76% | 37.97% | -24.21% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 13.76% | 34.91% | -21.15% |
BFJL vs. QCLN - Expense Ratio Comparison
BFJL has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than QCLN's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
BFJL vs. QCLN - Dividend Comparison
BFJL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.46%, more than QCLN's 0.15% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BFJL FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - July | 1.46% | 1.35% | 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
BFJL and QCLN have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, QCLN is cheaper at 0.60% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
QCLN is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for BFJL.
BFJL has the higher dividend yield at 1.46%, compared with 0.15% for QCLN.
BFJL is categorized as Defined Outcome, while QCLN is Alternative Energy Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for BFJL and 0.60% for QCLN.
Find the right allocation for BFJL 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