ESBG vs. QCLN
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 Index. ESBG is actively managed, while QCLN is passively managed. Their 0.55 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. ESBG charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for QCLN.
Performance
ESBG vs. QCLN - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ESBG achieves a -2.79% return, which is significantly lower than QCLN's 10.48% return.
ESBG
- 1D
- -0.46%
- 1M
- -2.07%
- 6M
- -11.15%
- YTD
- -2.79%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- —
QCLN
- 1D
- -0.26%
- 1M
- -13.14%
- 6M
- 0.01%
- YTD
- 10.48%
- 1Y
- 41.09%
- 3Y*
- -2.29%
- 5Y*
- -5.50%
- 10Y*
- 13.08%
- ALL TIME*
- 5.32%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $3.83K | $6.10K | $15.77K | |
| $12.39M | $13.63M | $14.46M |
ESBG vs. QCLN - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
ESBG First Trust Enhanced Stocks, Bonds & Gold ETF | -2.79% | 5.67% |
QCLN First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund | 10.48% | 4.69% |
Correlation
The correlation between ESBG and QCLN is 0.55, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 19, 2025 | 0.55 |
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
ESBG vs. QCLN — Risk / Return Rank
ESBG
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
QCLN
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.
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.
| ESBG | QCLN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.18 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 1.25 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 4.64 | — |
Loading charts...
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.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ESBG | QCLN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -18.84% | -76.18% | +57.34% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -32.12% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -50.96% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -69.49% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -71.73% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -17.57% | -42.92% | +25.35% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.52% | -43.36% | +34.84% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 8.62% | — |
Volatility
ESBG vs. QCLN - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ESBG | QCLN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 15.14% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 33.63% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 25.17% | 40.58% | -15.41% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 25.17% | 38.97% | -13.80% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.17% | 35.54% | -10.37% |
ESBG vs. QCLN - Expense Ratio Comparison
ESBG has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than QCLN's 0.59% expense ratio.
Dividends
ESBG vs. QCLN - Dividend Comparison
ESBG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.12%, more than QCLN's 0.17% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ESBG First Trust Enhanced Stocks, Bonds & Gold ETF | 1.12% | 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 | 0.17% | 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
ESBG and QCLN have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, QCLN is cheaper at 0.59% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
QCLN is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for ESBG.
ESBG has the higher dividend yield at 1.12%, compared with 0.17% for QCLN.
ESBG is categorized as Tactical Allocation, while QCLN is Alternative Energy Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for ESBG and 0.59% for QCLN.
Find the right allocation for ESBG 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