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

Performance

FPX vs. QCLN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust US Equity Opportunities ETF (FPX) 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, FPX achieves a 19.68% return, which is significantly lower than QCLN's 37.20% return. Over the past 10 years, FPX has underperformed QCLN with an annualized return of 15.44%, while QCLN has yielded a comparatively higher 16.79% annualized return.


FPX

1D
-3.29%
1M
3.59%
YTD
19.68%
6M
15.47%
1Y
39.59%
3Y*
32.36%
5Y*
9.53%
10Y*
15.44%

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)

FPX vs. QCLN - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FPX
First Trust US Equity Opportunities ETF
19.68%37.62%24.75%22.26%-35.11%3.69%47.89%30.37%-8.35%27.03%
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 FPX and QCLN is 0.70, 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

0.70

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.68

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.75

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.73

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 14, 2007

0.73

The correlation between FPX and QCLN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.68 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.

FPX vs. QCLN - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FPX
QCLN

Healthcare

22.5%

-

Technology

20.6%
47.6%

Industrials

12.7%
24.8%

Consumer Cyclical

8.8%
10.2%

Financial Services

8.8%
1.4%

Communication Services

7.8%

-

Consumer Defensive

3.9%

-

Energy

3.9%
0.1%

Real Estate

3.9%

-

Basic Materials

2.9%
7.8%

Utilities

2.0%
8.1%

Healthcare

FPX
22.5%
QCLN

-

Technology

FPX
20.6%
QCLN
47.6%

Industrials

FPX
12.7%
QCLN
24.8%

Consumer Cyclical

FPX
8.8%
QCLN
10.2%

Financial Services

FPX
8.8%
QCLN
1.4%

Communication Services

FPX
7.8%
QCLN

-

Consumer Defensive

FPX
3.9%
QCLN

-

Energy

FPX
3.9%
QCLN
0.1%

Real Estate

FPX
3.9%
QCLN

-

Basic Materials

FPX
2.9%
QCLN
7.8%

Utilities

FPX
2.0%
QCLN
8.1%

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

FPX vs. QCLN — Risk / Return Rank

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

FPX
FPX Risk / Return Rank: 5353
Overall Rank
FPX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4949
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FPX Sortino Ratio Rank: 4545
Sortino Ratio Rank
FPX Omega Ratio Rank: 4444
Omega Ratio Rank
FPX Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
FPX Martin Ratio Rank: 6060
Martin Ratio Rank

QCLN
QCLN Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
QCLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QCLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 6666
Sortino Ratio Rank
QCLN Omega Ratio Rank: 6464
Omega Ratio Rank
QCLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 9191
Calmar Ratio Rank
QCLN Martin Ratio Rank: 8888
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

FPX vs. QCLN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust US Equity Opportunities ETF (FPX) 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.


FPXQCLNDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.84

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.74

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.27

1.37

-0.09

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.24

5.64

-2.40

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.30

18.14

-7.83

FPX vs. QCLN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FPX Sharpe Ratio is 1.64, which is lower than the QCLN Sharpe Ratio of 2.47. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FPX 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

FPX vs. QCLN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FPX drawdown since its inception was -56.29%, smaller than the maximum QCLN drawdown of -76.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FPX and QCLN.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FPXQCLNDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-56.29%

-76.18%

+19.89%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.28%

-16.40%

+4.12%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-30.88%

-56.08%

+25.20%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-43.14%

-69.49%

+26.35%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-43.14%

-71.73%

+28.59%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.29%

-29.12%

+25.83%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-11.31%

-43.40%

+32.09%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.85%

5.09%

-1.24%

Volatility

FPX vs. QCLN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust US Equity Opportunities ETF (FPX) is 9.07%, while First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN) has a volatility of 17.77%. This indicates that FPX 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


FPXQCLNDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

9.07%

17.77%

-8.70%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

18.03%

29.96%

-11.93%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

24.36%

37.45%

-13.09%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

26.74%

38.54%

-11.80%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

24.39%

35.21%

-10.82%

FPX vs. QCLN - Expense Ratio Comparison

FPX has a 0.57% expense ratio, which is lower than QCLN's 0.59% expense ratio.


Dividends

FPX vs. QCLN - Dividend Comparison

FPX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.48%, more than QCLN's 0.16% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FPX
First Trust US Equity Opportunities ETF
0.48%0.53%0.09%0.27%1.08%0.14%0.28%0.67%0.88%0.68%0.77%0.62%
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


FPX and QCLN have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QCLN has higher volatility (17.77%) compared to FPX (9.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FPX dropped -56.29% vs QCLN's -76.18%.

On 10-year performance, QCLN leads with 16.79% vs 15.44% for FPX. On fees, FPX is cheaper at 0.57% per year. On volatility, FPX has been the lower-risk option at 9.07%. 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 16.79% return vs 15.44%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FPX is cheaper with a 0.57% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for QCLN.

FPX has the higher dividend yield at 0.48%, compared with 0.16% for QCLN.

FPX is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while QCLN is Alternative Energy Equities. FPX tracks IPOX-100 U.S. Index, while QCLN tracks Nasdaq Clean Edge Green Energy Index. Their fees differ too: 0.57% for FPX and 0.59% for QCLN.

QCLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.47 vs 1.64), 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 FPX 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