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

Performance

EMLP vs. QCLN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund (EMLP) 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, EMLP achieves a 16.16% return, which is significantly lower than QCLN's 37.20% return. Over the past 10 years, EMLP has underperformed QCLN with an annualized return of 10.26%, while QCLN has yielded a comparatively higher 16.79% annualized return.


EMLP

1D
1.23%
1M
-1.97%
YTD
16.16%
6M
16.10%
1Y
20.59%
3Y*
22.30%
5Y*
15.94%
10Y*
10.26%

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)

EMLP vs. QCLN - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
EMLP
First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund
16.16%9.67%33.39%8.05%10.39%23.20%-13.36%23.40%-8.70%1.07%
QCLN
First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund
37.20%31.81%-18.86%-10.02%-30.37%-3.21%184.00%42.65%-12.38%32.34%

Correlation

The correlation between EMLP and QCLN is 0.15, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.15

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

0.33

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

0.40

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.41

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 21, 2012

0.43

Over the past year, the correlation between EMLP and QCLN has dropped to 0.15 - well below their long-term average of 0.43, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

EMLP vs. QCLN - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
EMLP
QCLN

Utilities

54.0%
8.1%

Energy

27.0%
0.1%

Industrials

7.9%
24.8%

Basic Materials

1.6%
7.8%

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

10.2%

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Financial Services

-

1.4%

Healthcare

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Technology

-

47.6%

Utilities

EMLP
54.0%
QCLN
8.1%

Energy

EMLP
27.0%
QCLN
0.1%

Industrials

EMLP
7.9%
QCLN
24.8%

Basic Materials

EMLP
1.6%
QCLN
7.8%

Communication Services

EMLP

-

QCLN

-

Consumer Cyclical

EMLP

-

QCLN
10.2%

Consumer Defensive

EMLP

-

QCLN

-

Financial Services

EMLP

-

QCLN
1.4%

Healthcare

EMLP

-

QCLN

-

Real Estate

EMLP

-

QCLN

-

Technology

EMLP

-

QCLN
47.6%

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

EMLP vs. QCLN — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMLP
EMLP Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
EMLP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6868
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMLP Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMLP Omega Ratio Rank: 6262
Omega Ratio Rank
EMLP Calmar Ratio Rank: 8282
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMLP Martin Ratio Rank: 7070
Martin Ratio Rank

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.

EMLP vs. QCLN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund (EMLP) 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.


EMLPQCLNDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.40

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.11

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.35

1.37

-0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.19

5.64

-1.46

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.19

18.14

-5.95

EMLP vs. QCLN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMLP 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 EMLP 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

EMLP vs. QCLN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMLP drawdown since its inception was -43.61%, smaller than the maximum QCLN drawdown of -76.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMLP and QCLN.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EMLPQCLNDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-43.61%

-76.18%

+32.57%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.94%

-16.40%

+11.46%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-11.47%

-56.08%

+44.61%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-14.59%

-69.49%

+54.90%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-43.61%

-71.73%

+28.12%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.33%

-29.12%

+26.79%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.75%

-43.40%

+37.65%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.69%

5.09%

-3.40%

Volatility

EMLP vs. QCLN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund (EMLP) is 3.65%, while First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN) has a volatility of 17.77%. This indicates that EMLP 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


EMLPQCLNDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.65%

17.77%

-14.12%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.96%

29.96%

-22.00%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.97%

37.45%

-27.48%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.49%

38.54%

-24.05%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.69%

35.21%

-17.52%

EMLP vs. QCLN - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMLP has a 0.96% expense ratio, which is higher than QCLN's 0.59% expense ratio.


Dividends

EMLP vs. QCLN - Dividend Comparison

EMLP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.75%, more than QCLN's 0.16% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EMLP
First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund
2.75%3.18%3.19%3.92%3.15%3.29%4.70%3.71%4.71%3.80%3.62%4.63%
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


EMLP and QCLN have a correlation of 0.15, 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 EMLP (3.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMLP dropped -43.61% vs QCLN's -76.18%.

On 10-year performance, QCLN leads with 16.79% vs 10.26% for EMLP. On fees, QCLN is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, EMLP has been the lower-risk option at 3.65%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, QCLN has performed better with a 16.79% return vs 10.26%. 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 0.96% for EMLP.

EMLP has the higher dividend yield at 2.75%, compared with 0.16% for QCLN.

EMLP is categorized as MLPs, while QCLN is Alternative Energy Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.96% for EMLP 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 EMLP 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