PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FCG vs. QCLN
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FCG vs. QCLN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Natural Gas ETF (FCG) and First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FCG achieves a 25.55% return, which is significantly higher than QCLN's 13.15% return. Over the past 10 years, FCG has underperformed QCLN with an annualized return of 4.37%, while QCLN has yielded a comparatively higher 13.24% annualized return.


FCG

1D
-0.89%
1M
10.02%
6M
18.75%
YTD
25.55%
1Y
30.04%
3Y*
6.75%
5Y*
19.99%
10Y*
4.37%
ALL TIME*
-4.48%

QCLN

1D
2.42%
1M
-11.04%
6M
2.08%
YTD
13.15%
1Y
44.49%
3Y*
0.46%
5Y*
-5.34%
10Y*
13.24%
ALL TIME*
5.44%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$20.29M$18.94M$23.89M
$11.86M$13.23M$14.52M

FCG vs. QCLN - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FCG
First Trust Natural Gas ETF
25.55%-2.28%4.16%2.55%47.24%98.49%-23.20%-15.76%-34.81%-11.38%
QCLN
First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund
13.15%31.81%-18.86%-10.02%-30.37%-3.21%184.00%42.65%-12.38%32.34%

Correlation

The correlation between FCG and QCLN is -0.01, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

-0.01

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.24

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.31

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.36

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 11, 2007

0.48

The correlation between FCG and QCLN shifts across timeframes, from -0.01 (1 year) to 0.48 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FCG vs. QCLN - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FCG
QCLN

Energy

98.9%
0.1%

Technology

1.1%
43.0%

Basic Materials

-

8.0%

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

14.2%

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Financial Services

-

1.5%

Healthcare

-

-

Industrials

-

25.3%

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

7.9%

Energy

FCG
98.9%
QCLN
0.1%

Technology

FCG
1.1%
QCLN
43.0%

Basic Materials

FCG

-

QCLN
8.0%

Communication Services

FCG

-

QCLN

-

Consumer Cyclical

FCG

-

QCLN
14.2%

Consumer Defensive

FCG

-

QCLN

-

Financial Services

FCG

-

QCLN
1.5%

Healthcare

FCG

-

QCLN

-

Industrials

FCG

-

QCLN
25.3%

Real Estate

FCG

-

QCLN

-

Utilities

FCG

-

QCLN
7.9%

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

FCG vs. QCLN — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

FCG
FCG Risk / Return Rank: 4040
Overall Rank
FCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4343
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 4141
Sortino Ratio Rank
FCG Omega Ratio Rank: 3939
Omega Ratio Rank
FCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 4242
Calmar Ratio Rank
FCG Martin Ratio Rank: 3737
Martin Ratio Rank

QCLN
QCLN Risk / Return Rank: 4242
Overall Rank
QCLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4343
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QCLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 4242
Sortino Ratio Rank
QCLN Omega Ratio Rank: 4141
Omega Ratio Rank
QCLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 3939
Calmar Ratio Rank
QCLN Martin Ratio Rank: 4545
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

FCG vs. QCLN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Natural Gas ETF (FCG) 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.


FCGQCLNDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

0.00

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.05

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.19

1.20

-0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.53

1.39

+0.14

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.84

5.09

-1.25

FCG vs. QCLN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FCG Sharpe Ratio is 1.11, which is comparable to the QCLN Sharpe Ratio of 1.10. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FCG 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.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

FCG vs. QCLN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FCG drawdown since its inception was -97.20%, which is greater than QCLN's maximum drawdown of -76.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FCG and QCLN.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FCGQCLNDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-97.20%

-76.18%

-21.02%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-19.67%

-32.12%

+12.45%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-29.44%

-50.96%

+21.52%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-33.33%

-69.49%

+36.16%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-85.04%

-71.73%

-13.31%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-74.69%

-41.54%

-33.15%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-65.45%

-43.36%

-22.09%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

7.85%

8.77%

-0.92%

Volatility

FCG vs. QCLN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust Natural Gas ETF (FCG) is 8.92%, while First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN) has a volatility of 14.82%. This indicates that FCG 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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FCGQCLNDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.92%

14.82%

-5.90%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

21.33%

33.59%

-12.26%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

27.35%

40.67%

-13.32%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

33.06%

39.00%

-5.94%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

38.24%

35.56%

+2.68%

FCG vs. QCLN - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both FCG and QCLN have an expense ratio of 0.59%.


Dividends

FCG vs. QCLN - Dividend Comparison

FCG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.19%, more than QCLN's 0.17% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FCG
First Trust Natural Gas ETF
2.19%2.86%2.76%3.25%3.04%1.73%3.82%2.87%1.46%1.56%1.70%4.79%
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


FCG and QCLN have a correlation of -0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QCLN has higher volatility (14.82%) compared to FCG (8.92%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FCG dropped -97.20% vs QCLN's -76.18%.

On 10-year performance, QCLN leads with 13.24% vs 4.37% for FCG. Both ETFs have the same 0.59% expense ratio. On volatility, FCG has been the lower-risk option at 8.92%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, QCLN has performed better with a 13.24% return vs 4.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FCG and QCLN have the same expense ratio: 0.59% per year.

FCG has the higher dividend yield at 2.19%, compared with 0.17% for QCLN.

FCG is categorized as Energy Equities, while QCLN is Alternative Energy Equities. FCG tracks Nasdaq FactSet Natural Gas Index, while QCLN tracks Nasdaq Clean Edge Green Energy Index.

FCG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.11 vs 1.10), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FCG 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