FIIG vs. QCLN

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

FIIG (First Trust Intermediate Duration Investment Grade Corporate ETF) and QCLN (First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - FIIG is a Corporate Bonds fund actively managed by First Trust, while QCLN is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy. FIIG is actively managed, while QCLN is passively managed. Over the past year, FIIG returned 5.35% vs 130.32% for QCLN. At a 0.27 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FIIG charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for QCLN.

Performance

FIIG vs. QCLN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Intermediate Duration Investment Grade Corporate ETF (FIIG) 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, FIIG achieves a -0.39% return, which is significantly lower than QCLN's 53.57% return.

FIIG

• 1D: -0.02%
• 1M: -0.06%
• YTD: -0.39%
• 6M: -0.14%
• 1Y: 5.35%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QCLN

• 1D: 4.45%
• 1M: 15.68%
• YTD: 53.57%
• 6M: 53.62%
• 1Y: 130.32%
• 3Y*: 12.19%
• 5Y*: 2.59%
• 10Y*: 17.44%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FIIG vs. QCLN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FIIG First Trust Intermediate Duration Investment Grade Corporate ETF	-0.39%	8.80%	2.15%	6.83%
QCLN First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund	53.57%	31.81%	-18.86%	-17.17%

Correlation

The correlation between FIIG and QCLN is 0.21, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.21
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 4, 2023	0.27

Return for Risk

FIIG vs. QCLN — Risk / Return Rank

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

FIIG

FIIG Risk / Return Rank: 32
FIIG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 32
FIIG Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
FIIG Omega Ratio Rank: 30
FIIG Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
FIIG Martin Ratio Rank: 34

QCLN

QCLN Risk / Return Rank: 91
QCLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
QCLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
QCLN Omega Ratio Rank: 83
QCLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
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.

FIIG vs. QCLN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Intermediate Duration Investment Grade Corporate ETF (FIIG) 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.

	FIIG	QCLN	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.17	3.76	-2.59
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.69	4.06	-2.37
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.51	-0.30
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.65	8.02	-6.37
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	5.34	27.70	-22.36
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FIIG vs. QCLN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FIIG Sharpe Ratio is 1.17, which is lower than the QCLN Sharpe Ratio of 3.76. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FIIG 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

	FIIG	QCLN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.17	3.76	-2.59
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.07	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.50	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.04	0.20	+0.84

Drawdowns

FIIG vs. QCLN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FIIG drawdown since its inception was -5.50%, smaller than the maximum QCLN drawdown of -76.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FIIG and QCLN.

Drawdown Indicators

	FIIG	QCLN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.50%	-76.18%	+70.68%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.15%	-15.86%	+12.71%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-56.08%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-69.49%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-71.73%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.34%	-20.66%	+19.32%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.39%	-43.45%	+42.06%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.97%	4.59%	-3.62%

Volatility

FIIG vs. QCLN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust Intermediate Duration Investment Grade Corporate ETF (FIIG) is 1.65%, while First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN) has a volatility of 12.63%. This indicates that FIIG 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

	FIIG	QCLN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.65%	12.63%	-10.98%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.42%	26.18%	-22.76%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.61%	34.91%	-30.30%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.91%	37.98%	-32.07%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.91%	34.91%	-29.00%

FIIG vs. QCLN - Expense Ratio Comparison

FIIG has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than QCLN's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

FIIG vs. QCLN - Dividend Comparison

FIIG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.95%, more than QCLN's 0.15% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FIIG First Trust Intermediate Duration Investment Grade Corporate ETF	4.95%	4.76%	4.45%	1.72%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
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 FIIG and QCLN in my portfolio?

FIIG and QCLN have a correlation of 0.21, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FIIG or QCLN?

QCLN has higher volatility (12.63%) compared to FIIG (1.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FIIG dropped -5.50% vs QCLN's -76.18%.

Which ETF is better, FIIG or QCLN?

On 1-year performance, QCLN leads with 130.32% vs 5.35% for FIIG. On fees, QCLN is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, FIIG has been the lower-risk option at 1.65%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FIIG or QCLN?

Over the 1-year period, QCLN has performed better with a 130.32% return vs 5.35%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FIIG or QCLN?

QCLN is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for FIIG.

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

FIIG has the higher dividend yield at 4.95%, compared with 0.15% for QCLN.

What is the main difference between FIIG and QCLN?

FIIG is categorized as Corporate Bonds, while QCLN is Alternative Energy Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for FIIG and 0.60% for QCLN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QCLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.76 vs 1.17), 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.