FAB vs. QCLN

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

FAB (First Trust Multi Cap Value AlphaDEX Fund) and QCLN (First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - FAB is a Mid Cap Value Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ AlphaDEX Multi Cap Value Index, while QCLN is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, FAB returned 10.48%/yr vs 17.39%/yr for QCLN. A 0.65 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FAB charges 0.64%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for QCLN.

Performance

FAB vs. QCLN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Multi Cap Value AlphaDEX Fund (FAB) 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, FAB achieves a 11.59% return, which is significantly lower than QCLN's 52.94% return. Over the past 10 years, FAB has underperformed QCLN with an annualized return of 10.48%, while QCLN has yielded a comparatively higher 17.39% annualized return.

FAB

• 1D: 0.47%
• 1M: 0.35%
• YTD: 11.59%
• 6M: 13.25%
• 1Y: 28.98%
• 3Y*: 15.50%
• 5Y*: 8.03%
• 10Y*: 10.48%

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)

FAB vs. QCLN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FAB First Trust Multi Cap Value AlphaDEX Fund	11.59%	9.86%	7.82%	15.81%	-6.79%	30.83%	2.40%	23.73%	-14.62%	14.62%
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 FAB and QCLN is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.47
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.59
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.62
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.60
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 24, 2007	0.65

The correlation between FAB and QCLN shifts across timeframes, from 0.47 (1 year) to 0.65 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FAB vs. QCLN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FAB	QCLN
Financial Services	23.9%	1.9%
Consumer Cyclical	13.9%	9.4%
Industrials	12.0%	30.2%
Energy	8.3%	13.2%
Technology	7.9%	20.8%
Real Estate	7.7%	-
Healthcare	7.1%	-
Utilities	6.2%	13.2%
Consumer Defensive	5.9%	-
Basic Materials	3.9%	9.4%
Communication Services	2.7%	-

Return for Risk

FAB vs. QCLN — Risk / Return Rank

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

FAB

FAB Risk / Return Rank: 69
FAB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
FAB Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
FAB Omega Ratio Rank: 60
FAB Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
FAB Martin Ratio Rank: 71

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.

FAB vs. QCLN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Multi Cap Value AlphaDEX Fund (FAB) 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.

	FAB	QCLN	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.11	3.49	-1.38
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.21	3.86	-0.65
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.48	-0.11
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.31	7.62	-3.32
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	13.42	26.28	-12.87
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FAB vs. QCLN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FAB Sharpe Ratio is 2.11, which is lower than the QCLN Sharpe Ratio of 3.49. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FAB 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

	FAB	QCLN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.11	3.49	-1.38
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.43	0.06	+0.37
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.48	0.50	-0.02
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.34	0.20	+0.14

Drawdowns

FAB vs. QCLN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FAB drawdown since its inception was -63.29%, smaller than the maximum QCLN drawdown of -76.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FAB and QCLN.

Drawdown Indicators

	FAB	QCLN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-63.29%	-76.18%	+12.89%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.65%	-15.86%	+9.21%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.91%	-56.08%	+33.17%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-22.91%	-69.49%	+46.58%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-47.08%	-71.73%	+24.65%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.20%	-20.99%	+20.79%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.26%	-43.45%	+34.19%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.14%	4.59%	-2.45%

Volatility

FAB vs. QCLN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust Multi Cap Value AlphaDEX Fund (FAB) is 3.29%, while First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN) has a volatility of 12.56%. This indicates that FAB 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

	FAB	QCLN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.29%	12.56%	-9.27%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.60%	26.02%	-17.42%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.79%	34.88%	-21.09%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.71%	37.97%	-19.26%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.06%	34.91%	-12.85%

FAB vs. QCLN - Expense Ratio Comparison

FAB has a 0.64% expense ratio, which is higher than QCLN's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

FAB vs. QCLN - Dividend Comparison

FAB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.58%, more than QCLN's 0.15% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FAB First Trust Multi Cap Value AlphaDEX Fund	1.58%	1.57%	2.00%	1.94%	1.80%	1.32%	1.59%	1.75%	1.96%	1.42%	1.40%	1.62%
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 FAB and QCLN in my portfolio?

FAB and QCLN have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FAB or QCLN?

QCLN has higher volatility (12.56%) compared to FAB (3.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FAB dropped -63.29% vs QCLN's -76.18%.

Which ETF is better, FAB or QCLN?

On 10-year performance, QCLN leads with 17.39% vs 10.48% for FAB. On fees, QCLN is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, FAB has been the lower-risk option at 3.29%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FAB or QCLN?

Over the 10-year period, QCLN has performed better with a 17.39% return vs 10.48%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FAB or QCLN?

QCLN is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.64% for FAB.

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

FAB has the higher dividend yield at 1.58%, compared with 0.15% for QCLN.

What is the main difference between FAB and QCLN?

FAB is categorized as Mid Cap Value Equities, while QCLN is Alternative Energy Equities. FAB tracks NASDAQ AlphaDEX Multi Cap Value Index, while QCLN tracks NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy. Their fees differ too: 0.64% for FAB and 0.60% for QCLN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QCLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.49 vs 2.11), 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.