ESBG vs. QCLN

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

ESBG (First Trust Enhanced Stocks, Bonds & Gold ETF) and QCLN (First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - ESBG is a Tactical Allocation fund actively managed by First Trust, while QCLN is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy. ESBG is actively managed, while QCLN is passively managed. A 0.51 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ESBG charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for QCLN.

Performance

ESBG vs. QCLN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Enhanced Stocks, Bonds & Gold ETF (ESBG) 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, ESBG achieves a 5.96% return, which is significantly lower than QCLN's 52.00% return.

ESBG

• 1D: 0.79%
• 1M: 1.11%
• YTD: 5.96%
• 6M: 7.17%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QCLN

• 1D: -0.62%
• 1M: 13.54%
• YTD: 52.00%
• 6M: 46.53%
• 1Y: 117.87%
• 3Y*: 12.00%
• 5Y*: 2.04%
• 10Y*: 17.14%

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

ESBG vs. QCLN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
ESBG First Trust Enhanced Stocks, Bonds & Gold ETF	5.96%	5.72%
QCLN First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund	52.00%	4.19%

Correlation

The correlation between ESBG and QCLN is 0.51, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 20, 2025	0.51

Return for Risk

ESBG vs. QCLN — Risk / Return Rank

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

QCLN

QCLN Risk / Return Rank: 89
QCLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
QCLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
QCLN Omega Ratio Rank: 80
QCLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
QCLN Martin Ratio Rank: 93

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.

ESBG vs. QCLN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Enhanced Stocks, Bonds & Gold ETF (ESBG) 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ESBG	QCLN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	3.42	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.05	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.49	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.95	0.20	+0.75

Drawdowns

ESBG vs. QCLN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ESBG drawdown since its inception was -18.84%, smaller than the maximum QCLN drawdown of -76.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ESBG and QCLN.

Drawdown Indicators

	ESBG	QCLN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.84%	-76.18%	+57.34%
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 Drawdown Current decline from peak	-10.14%	-21.47%	+11.33%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.27%	-43.44%	+37.17%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	4.59%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	ESBG	QCLN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	12.57%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	26.03%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	25.19%	34.68%	-9.49%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.19%	37.96%	-12.77%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.19%	34.90%	-9.71%

ESBG vs. QCLN - Expense Ratio Comparison

ESBG has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than QCLN's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

ESBG vs. QCLN - Dividend Comparison

ESBG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.57%, more than QCLN's 0.15% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ESBG First Trust Enhanced Stocks, Bonds & Gold ETF	0.57%	0.24%	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

Can I hold both ESBG and QCLN in my portfolio?

ESBG and QCLN have a correlation of 0.51, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, ESBG or QCLN?

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.

Which ETF is cheaper, ESBG or QCLN?

QCLN is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for ESBG.

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

ESBG has the higher dividend yield at 0.57%, compared with 0.15% for QCLN.

What is the main difference between ESBG and QCLN?

ESBG is categorized as Tactical Allocation, while QCLN is Alternative Energy Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for ESBG and 0.60% for QCLN.