FCSG.L vs. QCLN.L
FCSG.L (First Trust Global Capital Strength ESG Leaders UCITS ETF Class A Accumulation) and QCLN.L (First Trust Nasdaq Clean Edge Green Energy UCITS ETF Acc) are both exchange-traded funds - FCSG.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI ACWI NR USD, while QCLN.L is a Energy Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Clean Energy TR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FCSG.L returned 5.92%/yr vs 2.45%/yr for QCLN.L. At a 0.26 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FCSG.L charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for QCLN.L.
Performance
FCSG.L vs. QCLN.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FCSG.L achieves a -1.69% return, which is significantly lower than QCLN.L's 50.74% return.
FCSG.L
- 1D
- 0.72%
- 1M
- 1.84%
- YTD
- -1.69%
- 6M
- -1.06%
- 1Y
- -0.11%
- 3Y*
- 6.29%
- 5Y*
- 5.92%
- 10Y*
- —
QCLN.L
- 1D
- -1.62%
- 1M
- 15.04%
- YTD
- 50.74%
- 6M
- 46.10%
- 1Y
- 117.65%
- 3Y*
- 8.19%
- 5Y*
- 2.45%
- 10Y*
- —
FCSG.L vs. QCLN.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FCSG.L First Trust Global Capital Strength ESG Leaders UCITS ETF Class A Accumulation | -1.69% | 3.93% | 11.42% | 6.17% | -3.68% | 23.55% |
QCLN.L First Trust Nasdaq Clean Edge Green Energy UCITS ETF Acc | 50.74% | 20.09% | -17.94% | -12.66% | -23.26% | -0.07% |
Correlation
The correlation between FCSG.L and QCLN.L is -0.03, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.03 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.17 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.27 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 11, 2021 | 0.26 |
The correlation between FCSG.L and QCLN.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.03 (1 year) to 0.27 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
FCSG.L vs. QCLN.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FCSG.L
QCLN.L
Financial Services
Consumer Defensive
-
Industrials
Technology
Healthcare
-
Basic Materials
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
-
Energy
-
Real Estate
-
-
Utilities
-
Financial Services
FCSG.L
QCLN.L
Consumer Defensive
FCSG.L
QCLN.L
-
Industrials
FCSG.L
QCLN.L
Technology
FCSG.L
QCLN.L
Healthcare
FCSG.L
QCLN.L
-
Basic Materials
FCSG.L
QCLN.L
Consumer Cyclical
FCSG.L
QCLN.L
Communication Services
FCSG.L
QCLN.L
-
Energy
FCSG.L
-
QCLN.L
Real Estate
FCSG.L
-
QCLN.L
-
Utilities
FCSG.L
-
QCLN.L
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
FCSG.L vs. QCLN.L — Risk / Return Rank
FCSG.L
QCLN.L
FCSG.L vs. QCLN.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Global Capital Strength ESG Leaders UCITS ETF Class A Accumulation (FCSG.L) and First Trust Nasdaq Clean Edge Green Energy UCITS ETF Acc (QCLN.L). 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.
| FCSG.L | QCLN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -3.45 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.98 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.01 | 1.47 | -0.46 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.01 | 7.96 | -7.98 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.04 | 25.08 | -25.12 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| FCSG.L | QCLN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.01 | 3.44 | -3.45 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.55 | 0.07 | +0.49 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.67 | -0.10 | +0.77 |
Drawdowns
FCSG.L vs. QCLN.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FCSG.L drawdown since its inception was -11.39%, smaller than the maximum QCLN.L drawdown of -69.87%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FCSG.L and QCLN.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FCSG.L | QCLN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -11.39% | -69.87% | +58.48% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.80% | -14.69% | +6.89% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -9.70% | -56.66% | +46.96% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -11.39% | -68.64% | +57.25% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.95% | -21.08% | +16.13% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.65% | -40.89% | +38.24% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.12% | 4.67% | -1.55% |
Volatility
FCSG.L vs. QCLN.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for First Trust Global Capital Strength ESG Leaders UCITS ETF Class A Accumulation (FCSG.L) is 2.83%, while First Trust Nasdaq Clean Edge Green Energy UCITS ETF Acc (QCLN.L) has a volatility of 14.86%. This indicates that FCSG.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QCLN.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FCSG.L | QCLN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.83% | 14.86% | -12.03% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 6.95% | 24.36% | -17.41% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 8.82% | 34.07% | -25.25% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 10.70% | 35.87% | -25.17% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 10.67% | 36.95% | -26.28% |
FCSG.L vs. QCLN.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
FCSG.L has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than QCLN.L's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
FCSG.L vs. QCLN.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither FCSG.L nor QCLN.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
FCSG.L and QCLN.L have a correlation of -0.03, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, QCLN.L is cheaper at 0.60% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
QCLN.L is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for FCSG.L.
FCSG.L is categorized as Global Equities, while QCLN.L is Energy Equities. FCSG.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD, while QCLN.L tracks S&P Global Clean Energy TR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for FCSG.L and 0.60% for QCLN.L.
Find the right allocation for FCSG.L and QCLN.L
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