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

Performance

ECLN vs. QCLN - 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 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, ECLN achieves a 12.96% return, which is significantly lower than QCLN's 37.20% return.


ECLN

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

QCLN

1D
-6.27%
1M
-3.52%
YTD
37.20%
6M
31.57%
1Y
92.03%
3Y*
8.84%
5Y*
-1.13%
10Y*
16.79%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ECLN vs. QCLN - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
ECLN
First Trust EIP Carbon Impact ETF
12.96%16.78%22.60%-3.36%5.28%12.26%8.98%5.66%
QCLN
First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund
37.20%31.81%-18.86%-10.02%-30.37%-3.21%184.00%15.34%

Correlation

The correlation between ECLN and QCLN is 0.30, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.30

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

0.37

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

0.42

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 20, 2019

0.40

The correlation between ECLN and QCLN shifts across timeframes, from 0.30 (1 year) to 0.42 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

ECLN vs. QCLN - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ECLN
QCLN

Utilities

76.4%
8.1%

Energy

16.3%
0.1%

Industrials

6.8%
24.8%

Technology

0.5%
47.6%

Basic Materials

-

7.8%

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

10.2%

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Financial Services

-

1.4%

Healthcare

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

ECLN
76.4%
QCLN
8.1%

Energy

ECLN
16.3%
QCLN
0.1%

Industrials

ECLN
6.8%
QCLN
24.8%

Technology

ECLN
0.5%
QCLN
47.6%

Basic Materials

ECLN

-

QCLN
7.8%

Communication Services

ECLN

-

QCLN

-

Consumer Cyclical

ECLN

-

QCLN
10.2%

Consumer Defensive

ECLN

-

QCLN

-

Financial Services

ECLN

-

QCLN
1.4%

Healthcare

ECLN

-

QCLN

-

Real Estate

ECLN

-

QCLN

-

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

ECLN vs. QCLN — 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.


QCLN
QCLN Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
QCLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QCLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 6666
Sortino Ratio Rank
QCLN Omega Ratio Rank: 6464
Omega Ratio Rank
QCLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 9191
Calmar Ratio Rank
QCLN Martin Ratio Rank: 8888
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.

ECLN vs. QCLN - 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 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.

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.


ECLNQCLNDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.39

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.14

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.36

1.37

-0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.33

5.64

-1.31

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.59

18.14

-6.55

ECLN vs. QCLN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ECLN Sharpe Ratio is 2.08, which is comparable to the QCLN Sharpe Ratio of 2.47. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ECLN 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...

Drawdowns

ECLN vs. QCLN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ECLN drawdown since its inception was -32.28%, smaller than the maximum QCLN drawdown of -76.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ECLN and QCLN.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ECLNQCLNDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-32.28%

-76.18%

+43.90%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.02%

-16.40%

+11.38%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.68%

-56.08%

+41.40%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-19.88%

-69.49%

+49.61%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-71.73%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.96%

-29.12%

+26.16%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.99%

-43.40%

+38.41%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.87%

5.09%

-3.22%

Volatility

ECLN vs. QCLN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust EIP Carbon Impact ETF (ECLN) is 3.75%, while First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN) has a volatility of 17.77%. This indicates that ECLN 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


ECLNQCLNDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.75%

17.77%

-14.02%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.12%

29.96%

-21.84%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.45%

37.45%

-27.00%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.22%

38.54%

-24.32%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.39%

35.21%

-17.82%

ECLN vs. QCLN - Expense Ratio Comparison

ECLN has a 0.97% expense ratio, which is higher than QCLN's 0.59% expense ratio.


Dividends

ECLN vs. QCLN - Dividend Comparison

ECLN has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QCLN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.16%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ECLN
First Trust EIP Carbon Impact ETF
1.81%1.97%2.52%2.54%1.72%1.66%1.68%0.71%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
QCLN
First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund
0.16%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


ECLN and QCLN have a correlation of 0.30, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QCLN has higher volatility (17.77%) compared to ECLN (3.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ECLN dropped -32.28% vs QCLN's -76.18%.

On 5-year performance, ECLN leads with 12.01% vs -1.13% for QCLN. On fees, QCLN is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, ECLN has been the lower-risk option at 3.75%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, ECLN has performed better with a 12.01% return vs -1.13%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

QCLN is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.97% for ECLN.

ECLN has the higher dividend yield at 1.81%, compared with 0.16% for QCLN.

ECLN is categorized as Utilities Equities, while QCLN is Alternative Energy Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.97% for ECLN and 0.59% for QCLN.

QCLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.47 vs 2.08), 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 ECLN 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