FDT vs. QCLN

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FDT (First Trust Developed Markets ex-US AlphaDEX Fund) and QCLN (First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - FDT is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ AlphaDEX DM Ex-US 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, FDT returned 10.91%/yr vs 17.39%/yr for QCLN. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FDT charges 0.80%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for QCLN.

Performance

FDT vs. QCLN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Developed Markets ex-US AlphaDEX Fund (FDT) 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, FDT achieves a 25.50% return, which is significantly lower than QCLN's 52.94% return. Over the past 10 years, FDT has underperformed QCLN with an annualized return of 10.91%, while QCLN has yielded a comparatively higher 17.39% annualized return.

FDT

• 1D: -0.64%
• 1M: 5.22%
• YTD: 25.50%
• 6M: 28.63%
• 1Y: 55.05%
• 3Y*: 30.08%
• 5Y*: 12.55%
• 10Y*: 10.91%

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)

FDT vs. QCLN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FDT First Trust Developed Markets ex-US AlphaDEX Fund	25.50%	52.21%	6.97%	15.03%	-19.51%	11.43%	4.29%	16.82%	-19.98%	34.42%
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 FDT and QCLN is 0.56, 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	0.56
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.55
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.58
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.60
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 20, 2011	0.60

The correlation between FDT and QCLN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.55 to 0.60 - a consistent structural relationship.

FDT vs. QCLN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FDT	QCLN
Industrials	34.0%	30.2%
Consumer Cyclical	11.5%	9.4%
Financial Services	10.2%	1.9%
Basic Materials	9.6%	9.4%
Energy	9.2%	13.2%
Technology	8.1%	20.8%
Real Estate	5.3%	-
Utilities	5.2%	13.2%
Consumer Defensive	2.8%	-
Communication Services	2.7%	-
Healthcare	1.4%	-

Return for Risk

FDT vs. QCLN — Risk / Return Rank

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

FDT

FDT Risk / Return Rank: 84
FDT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
FDT Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
FDT Omega Ratio Rank: 86
FDT Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
FDT Martin Ratio Rank: 81

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.

FDT vs. QCLN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Developed Markets ex-US AlphaDEX Fund (FDT) 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.

	FDT	QCLN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.00	3.49	-0.48
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.85	3.86	-0.01
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.54	1.48	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.13	7.62	-3.50
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.12	26.28	-10.17
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FDT vs. QCLN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FDT Sharpe Ratio is 3.00, which is comparable to the QCLN Sharpe Ratio of 3.49. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FDT 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

	FDT	QCLN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.00	3.49	-0.48
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.69	0.06	+0.63
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.59	0.50	+0.09
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.40	0.20	+0.19

Drawdowns

FDT vs. QCLN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FDT drawdown since its inception was -46.10%, smaller than the maximum QCLN drawdown of -76.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FDT and QCLN.

Drawdown Indicators

	FDT	QCLN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-46.10%	-76.18%	+30.08%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.41%	-15.86%	+2.45%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.29%	-56.08%	+41.79%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-33.18%	-69.49%	+36.31%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-46.10%	-71.73%	+25.63%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.59%	-20.99%	+19.40%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.78%	-43.45%	+32.67%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.43%	4.59%	-1.16%

Volatility

FDT vs. QCLN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust Developed Markets ex-US AlphaDEX Fund (FDT) is 7.23%, while First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN) has a volatility of 12.56%. This indicates that FDT 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

	FDT	QCLN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.23%	12.56%	-5.33%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.91%	26.02%	-10.11%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.42%	34.88%	-16.46%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.23%	37.97%	-19.74%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.52%	34.91%	-16.39%

FDT vs. QCLN - Expense Ratio Comparison

FDT has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is higher than QCLN's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

FDT vs. QCLN - Dividend Comparison

FDT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.84%, more than QCLN's 0.15% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FDT First Trust Developed Markets ex-US AlphaDEX Fund	2.84%	3.27%	3.89%	4.36%	2.29%	3.80%	2.42%	2.78%	2.13%	1.57%	1.76%	1.83%
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 FDT and QCLN in my portfolio?

FDT and QCLN have a correlation of 0.56, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FDT or QCLN?

QCLN has higher volatility (12.56%) compared to FDT (7.23%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FDT dropped -46.10% vs QCLN's -76.18%.

Which ETF is better, FDT or QCLN?

On 10-year performance, QCLN leads with 17.39% vs 10.91% for FDT. On fees, QCLN is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, FDT has been the lower-risk option at 7.23%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FDT or QCLN?

Over the 10-year period, QCLN has performed better with a 17.39% return vs 10.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FDT or QCLN?

QCLN is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for FDT.

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

FDT has the higher dividend yield at 2.84%, compared with 0.15% for QCLN.

What is the main difference between FDT and QCLN?

FDT is categorized as Foreign Large Cap Equities, while QCLN is Alternative Energy Equities. FDT tracks NASDAQ AlphaDEX DM Ex-US Index, while QCLN tracks NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy. Their fees differ too: 0.80% for FDT and 0.60% for QCLN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QCLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.49 vs 3.00), 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.