ECLN vs. FPWR

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

ECLN (First Trust EIP Carbon Impact ETF) and FPWR (First Trust EIP Power Solutions ETF) are both Utilities Equities funds from First Trust. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, ECLN returned 12.01%/yr vs 12.46%/yr for FPWR. With a 1.00 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. ECLN charges 0.97%/yr vs 0.96%/yr for FPWR.

Performance

ECLN vs. FPWR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust EIP Carbon Impact ETF (ECLN) and First Trust EIP Power Solutions ETF (FPWR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ECLN achieves a 12.96% return, which is significantly lower than FPWR's 14.10% return.

ECLN

• 1D: 0.16%
• 1M: -1.81%
• YTD: 12.96%
• 6M: 12.92%
• 1Y: 19.73%
• 3Y*: 17.40%
• 5Y*: 12.01%
• 10Y*: —

FPWR

• 1D: 0.73%
• 1M: -0.82%
• YTD: 14.10%
• 6M: 14.06%
• 1Y: 20.93%
• 3Y*: 18.24%
• 5Y*: 12.46%
• 10Y*: —

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

ECLN vs. FPWR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
ECLN First Trust EIP Carbon Impact ETF	12.96%	16.78%	22.60%	-3.36%	5.28%	12.26%	8.98%	5.66%
FPWR First Trust EIP Power Solutions ETF	14.10%	16.78%	22.60%	-3.36%	5.28%	12.26%	8.98%	5.66%

Correlation

The correlation between ECLN and FPWR is 0.97 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.97
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.99
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.00
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 20, 2019	1.00

The correlation between ECLN and FPWR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.97 to 1.00 - a consistent structural relationship.

ECLN vs. FPWR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ECLN	FPWR
Utilities	76.4%	51.7%
Energy	16.3%	30.0%
Industrials	6.8%	6.7%
Technology	0.5%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	1.7%
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

ECLN vs. FPWR — Risk / Return Rank

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

ECLN

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

FPWR

FPWR Risk / Return Rank: 70
FPWR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
FPWR Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
FPWR Omega Ratio Rank: 64
FPWR Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
FPWR Martin Ratio Rank: 64

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.

ECLN vs. FPWR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust EIP Carbon Impact ETF (ECLN) and First Trust EIP Power Solutions ETF (FPWR). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	ECLN	FPWR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.08	2.00	+0.08
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.03	2.89	+0.14
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	1.35	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.33	4.19	+0.14
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.59	10.54	+1.05

ECLN vs. FPWR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ECLN Sharpe Ratio is 2.08, which is comparable to the FPWR Sharpe Ratio of 2.00. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ECLN and FPWR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

ECLN vs. FPWR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ECLN drawdown since its inception was -32.28%, roughly equal to the maximum FPWR drawdown of -32.28%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ECLN and FPWR.

Drawdown Indicators

	ECLN	FPWR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-32.28%	-32.28%	0.00%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.02%	-5.02%	0.00%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.68%	-14.68%	0.00%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.88%	-19.88%	0.00%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.96%	-1.98%	-0.98%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.99%	-4.98%	-0.01%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.87%	1.99%	-0.12%

Volatility

ECLN vs. FPWR - Volatility Comparison

First Trust EIP Carbon Impact ETF (ECLN) and First Trust EIP Power Solutions ETF (FPWR) have volatilities of 3.75% and 3.60%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ECLN	FPWR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.75%	3.60%	+0.15%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.12%	8.20%	-0.08%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.45%	10.57%	-0.12%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.22%	14.21%	+0.01%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.39%	17.36%	+0.03%

ECLN vs. FPWR - Expense Ratio Comparison

ECLN has a 0.97% expense ratio, which is higher than FPWR's 0.96% expense ratio.

Dividends

ECLN vs. FPWR - Dividend Comparison

ECLN has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FPWR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.80%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
ECLN First Trust EIP Carbon Impact ETF	1.81%	1.97%	2.52%	2.54%	1.72%	1.66%	1.68%	0.71%
FPWR First Trust EIP Power Solutions ETF	1.80%	1.97%	2.52%	2.54%	1.72%	1.66%	1.68%	0.71%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ECLN and FPWR in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.97, ECLN and FPWR move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, ECLN or FPWR?

ECLN has higher volatility (3.75%) compared to FPWR (3.60%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ECLN dropped -32.28% vs FPWR's -32.28%.

Which ETF is better, ECLN or FPWR?

On 5-year performance, FPWR leads with 12.46% vs 12.01% for ECLN. On fees, FPWR is cheaper at 0.96% per year. On volatility, FPWR has been the lower-risk option at 3.60%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ECLN or FPWR?

Over the 5-year period, FPWR has performed better with a 12.46% return vs 12.01%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ECLN or FPWR?

FPWR is cheaper with a 0.96% expense ratio, compared with 0.97% for ECLN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ECLN or FPWR?

ECLN has the higher dividend yield at 1.81%, compared with 1.80% for FPWR.

What is the main difference between ECLN and FPWR?

Their fees differ too: 0.97% for ECLN and 0.96% for FPWR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ECLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.08 vs 2.00), 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.