EMLP vs. QCLN

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

EMLP (First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund) and QCLN (First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - EMLP is a MLPs fund actively managed by First Trust, while QCLN is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy. EMLP is actively managed, while QCLN is passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EMLP returned 10.24%/yr vs 17.39%/yr for QCLN. At a 0.43 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EMLP charges 0.96%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for QCLN.

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.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMLP achieves a 14.62% return, which is significantly lower than QCLN's 52.94% return. Over the past 10 years, EMLP has underperformed QCLN with an annualized return of 10.24%, while QCLN has yielded a comparatively higher 17.39% annualized return.

EMLP

• 1D: -0.07%
• 1M: -3.08%
• YTD: 14.62%
• 6M: 13.20%
• 1Y: 18.77%
• 3Y*: 21.22%
• 5Y*: 15.47%
• 10Y*: 10.24%

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)

EMLP vs. QCLN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
EMLP First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund	14.62%	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	52.94%	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 0.17, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.17
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.34
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.40
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.42
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 22, 2012	0.43

Over the past year, the correlation between EMLP and QCLN has dropped to 0.17 - 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
Energy	48.1%	13.2%
Utilities	47.4%	13.2%
Industrials	3.9%	30.2%
Basic Materials	0.6%	9.4%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	9.4%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	1.9%
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	20.8%

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: 61
EMLP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
EMLP Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
EMLP Omega Ratio Rank: 51
EMLP Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
EMLP Martin Ratio Rank: 67

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.

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.

	EMLP	QCLN	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.89	3.49	-1.59
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.73	3.86	-1.13
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.48	-0.16
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.82	7.62	-3.81
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	12.42	26.28	-13.87
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EMLP vs. QCLN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMLP Sharpe Ratio is 1.89, which is lower than the QCLN Sharpe Ratio of 3.49. 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	EMLP	QCLN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.89	3.49	-1.59
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.07	0.06	+1.01
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.58	0.50	+0.08
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.57	0.20	+0.37

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.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMLP	QCLN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-43.61%	-76.18%	+32.57%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.94%	-15.86%	+10.92%
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	-3.62%	-20.99%	+17.37%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.76%	-43.45%	+37.69%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.52%	4.59%	-3.07%

Volatility

EMLP vs. QCLN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund (EMLP) is 4.10%, while First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN) has a volatility of 12.56%. 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.

Volatility by Period

	EMLP	QCLN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.10%	12.56%	-8.46%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.87%	26.02%	-18.15%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.97%	34.88%	-24.91%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.53%	37.97%	-23.44%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.69%	34.91%	-17.22%

EMLP vs. QCLN - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMLP has a 0.96% expense ratio, which is higher than QCLN's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

EMLP vs. QCLN - Dividend Comparison

EMLP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.79%, more than QCLN's 0.15% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EMLP First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund	2.79%	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	0.15%	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 EMLP and QCLN in my portfolio?

EMLP and QCLN have a correlation of 0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EMLP or QCLN?

QCLN has higher volatility (12.56%) compared to EMLP (4.10%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMLP dropped -43.61% vs QCLN's -76.18%.

Which ETF is better, EMLP or QCLN?

On 10-year performance, QCLN leads with 17.39% vs 10.24% for EMLP. On fees, QCLN is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, EMLP has been the lower-risk option at 4.10%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EMLP or QCLN?

Over the 10-year period, QCLN has performed better with a 17.39% return vs 10.24%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EMLP or QCLN?

QCLN is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.96% for EMLP.

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

EMLP has the higher dividend yield at 2.79%, compared with 0.15% for QCLN.

What is the main difference between EMLP and QCLN?

EMLP is categorized as MLPs, while QCLN is Alternative Energy Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.96% for EMLP and 0.60% for QCLN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QCLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.49 vs 1.89), 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.