FVC vs. QCLN

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FVC (First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF) and QCLN (First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - FVC is a Hedge Fund fund tracking the Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus Five 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, FVC returned 8.62%/yr vs 17.39%/yr for QCLN. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FVC charges 0.71%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for QCLN.

Performance

FVC vs. QCLN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF (FVC) 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, FVC achieves a 17.30% return, which is significantly lower than QCLN's 52.94% return. Over the past 10 years, FVC has underperformed QCLN with an annualized return of 8.62%, while QCLN has yielded a comparatively higher 17.39% annualized return.

FVC

• 1D: 1.40%
• 1M: 11.30%
• YTD: 17.30%
• 6M: 17.97%
• 1Y: 23.41%
• 3Y*: 10.91%
• 5Y*: 4.98%
• 10Y*: 8.62%

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)

FVC vs. QCLN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FVC First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF	17.30%	2.12%	12.43%	-4.59%	-6.03%	21.92%	12.71%	19.28%	-8.60%	19.74%
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 FVC and QCLN is 0.66, 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	0.66
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.67
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.66
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.69
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 21, 2016	0.68

The correlation between FVC and QCLN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.66 to 0.69 - a consistent structural relationship.

FVC vs. QCLN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FVC	QCLN
Technology	29.0%	20.8%
Industrials	27.8%	30.2%
Financial Services	19.8%	1.9%
Healthcare	19.4%	-
Energy	17.5%	13.2%
Consumer Cyclical	6.4%	9.4%
Communication Services	6.3%	-
Real Estate	0.7%	-
Basic Materials	-	9.4%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Utilities	-	13.2%

Return for Risk

FVC vs. QCLN — Risk / Return Rank

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

FVC

FVC Risk / Return Rank: 49
FVC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 53
FVC Sortino Ratio Rank: 53
FVC Omega Ratio Rank: 61
FVC Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
FVC Martin Ratio Rank: 43

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.

FVC vs. QCLN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF (FVC) 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.

	FVC	QCLN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.82	3.49	-1.67
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.55	3.86	-1.31
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.48	-0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.77	7.62	-5.86
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.94	26.28	-19.34
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FVC vs. QCLN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FVC Sharpe Ratio is 1.82, which is lower than the QCLN Sharpe Ratio of 3.49. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FVC 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

	FVC	QCLN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.82	3.49	-1.67
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.31	0.06	+0.25
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.49	0.50	-0.01
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.50	0.20	+0.30

Drawdowns

FVC vs. QCLN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FVC drawdown since its inception was -30.96%, smaller than the maximum QCLN drawdown of -76.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FVC and QCLN.

Drawdown Indicators

	FVC	QCLN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-30.96%	-76.18%	+45.22%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.32%	-15.86%	+2.54%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.75%	-56.08%	+41.33%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-22.62%	-69.49%	+46.87%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-30.96%	-71.73%	+40.77%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-20.99%	+20.99%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.06%	-43.45%	+36.39%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.38%	4.59%	-1.21%

Volatility

FVC vs. QCLN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF (FVC) is 4.29%, while First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN) has a volatility of 12.56%. This indicates that FVC 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

	FVC	QCLN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.29%	12.56%	-8.27%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.37%	26.02%	-13.65%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.94%	34.88%	-21.94%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.30%	37.97%	-21.67%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.61%	34.91%	-17.30%

FVC vs. QCLN - Expense Ratio Comparison

FVC has a 0.71% expense ratio, which is higher than QCLN's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

FVC vs. QCLN - Dividend Comparison

FVC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.92%, more than QCLN's 0.15% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FVC First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF	1.92%	2.57%	0.78%	1.89%	1.50%	0.09%	0.21%	1.07%	0.24%	0.63%	0.67%	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 FVC and QCLN in my portfolio?

FVC and QCLN have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FVC or QCLN?

QCLN has higher volatility (12.56%) compared to FVC (4.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FVC dropped -30.96% vs QCLN's -76.18%.

Which ETF is better, FVC or QCLN?

On 10-year performance, QCLN leads with 17.39% vs 8.62% for FVC. On fees, QCLN is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, FVC has been the lower-risk option at 4.29%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FVC or QCLN?

Over the 10-year period, QCLN has performed better with a 17.39% return vs 8.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FVC or QCLN?

QCLN is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.71% for FVC.

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

FVC has the higher dividend yield at 1.92%, compared with 0.15% for QCLN.

What is the main difference between FVC and QCLN?

FVC is categorized as Hedge Fund, while QCLN is Alternative Energy Equities. FVC tracks Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus Five Index, while QCLN tracks NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy. Their fees differ too: 0.71% for FVC and 0.60% for QCLN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QCLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.49 vs 1.82), 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.