FAN vs. QCLN

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

FAN (First Trust Global Wind Energy ETF) and QCLN (First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund) are both Alternative Energy Equities funds from First Trust - FAN tracks the ISE Clean Edge Global Wind Energy Index while QCLN tracks the Nasdaq Clean Edge Green Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, FAN returned 9.88%/yr vs 16.79%/yr for QCLN. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FAN charges 0.62%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for QCLN.

Performance

FAN vs. QCLN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Global Wind Energy ETF (FAN) 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, FAN achieves a 20.47% return, which is significantly lower than QCLN's 37.20% return. Over the past 10 years, FAN has underperformed QCLN with an annualized return of 9.88%, while QCLN has yielded a comparatively higher 16.79% annualized return.

FAN

• 1D: -2.65%
• 1M: -5.81%
• YTD: 20.47%
• 6M: 20.15%
• 1Y: 38.86%
• 3Y*: 14.67%
• 5Y*: 4.21%
• 10Y*: 9.88%

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)

FAN vs. QCLN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FAN First Trust Global Wind Energy ETF	20.47%	40.38%	-8.96%	-3.20%	-13.12%	-11.63%	61.16%	31.22%	-11.40%	16.30%
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 FAN and QCLN is 0.63, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.63
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.66
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.66
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.61
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 27, 2008	0.62

The correlation between FAN and QCLN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.66 - a consistent structural relationship.

FAN vs. QCLN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FAN	QCLN
Utilities	55.7%	8.1%
Industrials	41.3%	24.8%
Consumer Cyclical	1.7%	10.2%
Energy	1.1%	0.1%
Basic Materials	0.3%	7.8%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	1.4%
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	47.6%

Return for Risk

FAN vs. QCLN — Risk / Return Rank

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

FAN

FAN Risk / Return Rank: 63
FAN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
FAN Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
FAN Omega Ratio Rank: 55
FAN Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
FAN Martin Ratio Rank: 67

QCLN

QCLN Risk / Return Rank: 78
QCLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
QCLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
QCLN Omega Ratio Rank: 64
QCLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
QCLN Martin Ratio Rank: 88

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.

FAN vs. QCLN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Global Wind Energy ETF (FAN) 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.

	FAN	QCLN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.91	2.47	-0.56
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.57	2.90	-0.33
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.37	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.51	5.64	-2.13
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.64	18.14	-6.49

FAN vs. QCLN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FAN Sharpe Ratio is 1.91, which is comparable to the QCLN Sharpe Ratio of 2.47. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FAN 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.

Drawdowns

FAN vs. QCLN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FAN drawdown since its inception was -79.94%, roughly equal to the maximum QCLN drawdown of -76.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FAN and QCLN.

Drawdown Indicators

	FAN	QCLN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-79.94%	-76.18%	-3.76%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.13%	-16.40%	+5.27%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.46%	-56.08%	+31.62%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-38.45%	-69.49%	+31.04%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-46.29%	-71.73%	+25.44%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.44%	-29.12%	+19.68%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-45.08%	-43.40%	-1.68%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.35%	5.09%	-1.74%

Volatility

FAN vs. QCLN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust Global Wind Energy ETF (FAN) is 6.87%, while First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN) has a volatility of 17.77%. This indicates that FAN 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

	FAN	QCLN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.87%	17.77%	-10.90%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.93%	29.96%	-14.03%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.41%	37.45%	-17.04%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.42%	38.54%	-17.12%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.96%	35.21%	-14.25%

FAN vs. QCLN - Expense Ratio Comparison

FAN has a 0.62% expense ratio, which is higher than QCLN's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

FAN vs. QCLN - Dividend Comparison

FAN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.03%, more than QCLN's 0.16% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FAN First Trust Global Wind Energy ETF	1.03%	1.35%	1.52%	1.71%	1.50%	1.79%	0.84%	2.42%	2.67%	2.59%	6.04%	2.35%
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

Can I hold both FAN and QCLN in my portfolio?

FAN and QCLN have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FAN or QCLN?

QCLN has higher volatility (17.77%) compared to FAN (6.87%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FAN dropped -79.94% vs QCLN's -76.18%.

Which ETF is better, FAN or QCLN?

On 10-year performance, QCLN leads with 16.79% vs 9.88% for FAN. On fees, QCLN is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, FAN has been the lower-risk option at 6.87%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FAN or QCLN?

Over the 10-year period, QCLN has performed better with a 16.79% return vs 9.88%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FAN or QCLN?

QCLN is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.62% for FAN.

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

FAN has the higher dividend yield at 1.03%, compared with 0.16% for QCLN.

What is the main difference between FAN and QCLN?

FAN tracks ISE Clean Edge Global Wind Energy Index, while QCLN tracks Nasdaq Clean Edge Green Energy Index. Their fees differ too: 0.62% for FAN and 0.59% for QCLN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QCLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.47 vs 1.91), 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.