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

Performance

FXH vs. QCLN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Health Care AlphaDEX Fund (FXH) 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, FXH achieves a 0.68% return, which is significantly lower than QCLN's 52.94% return. Over the past 10 years, FXH has underperformed QCLN with an annualized return of 7.03%, while QCLN has yielded a comparatively higher 17.39% annualized return.


FXH

1D
1.48%
1M
1.65%
YTD
0.68%
6M
-0.88%
1Y
13.28%
3Y*
3.52%
5Y*
0.56%
10Y*
7.03%

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)

FXH vs. QCLN - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FXH
First Trust Health Care AlphaDEX Fund
0.68%10.16%0.96%-4.53%-12.24%15.20%28.00%22.26%-1.33%21.82%
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 FXH and QCLN is 0.33, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.33

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

0.46

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

0.52

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

0.55

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 11, 2007

0.57

Over the past year, the correlation between FXH and QCLN has dropped to 0.33 - well below their long-term average of 0.57, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

FXH vs. QCLN - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FXH
QCLN

Healthcare

100.0%

-

Basic Materials

-

9.4%

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

9.4%

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

13.2%

Financial Services

-

1.9%

Industrials

-

30.2%

Real Estate

-

-

Technology

-

20.8%

Utilities

-

13.2%

Healthcare

FXH
100.0%
QCLN

-

Basic Materials

FXH

-

QCLN
9.4%

Communication Services

FXH

-

QCLN

-

Consumer Cyclical

FXH

-

QCLN
9.4%

Consumer Defensive

FXH

-

QCLN

-

Energy

FXH

-

QCLN
13.2%

Financial Services

FXH

-

QCLN
1.9%

Industrials

FXH

-

QCLN
30.2%

Real Estate

FXH

-

QCLN

-

Technology

FXH

-

QCLN
20.8%

Utilities

FXH

-

QCLN
13.2%

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

FXH vs. QCLN — Risk / Return Rank

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

FXH
FXH Risk / Return Rank: 2424
Overall Rank
FXH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2424
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FXH Sortino Ratio Rank: 2424
Sortino Ratio Rank
FXH Omega Ratio Rank: 2323
Omega Ratio Rank
FXH Calmar Ratio Rank: 2424
Calmar Ratio Rank
FXH Martin Ratio Rank: 2525
Martin Ratio Rank

QCLN
QCLN Risk / Return Rank: 8989
Overall Rank
QCLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9393
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QCLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 8484
Sortino Ratio Rank
QCLN Omega Ratio Rank: 7979
Omega Ratio Rank
QCLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
QCLN Martin Ratio Rank: 9494
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.

FXH vs. QCLN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Health Care AlphaDEX Fund (FXH) 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.


FXHQCLNDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.64

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.51

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.15

1.48

-0.33

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.09

7.62

-6.53

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.33

26.28

-22.95

FXH vs. QCLN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FXH Sharpe Ratio is 0.85, which is lower than the QCLN Sharpe Ratio of 3.49. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FXH 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FXHQCLNDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.85

3.49

-2.64

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.03

0.06

-0.02

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.38

0.50

-0.12

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.51

0.20

+0.31

Drawdowns

FXH vs. QCLN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FXH drawdown since its inception was -43.70%, smaller than the maximum QCLN drawdown of -76.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FXH and QCLN.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FXHQCLNDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-43.70%

-76.18%

+32.48%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.20%

-15.86%

+3.66%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.53%

-56.08%

+38.55%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.49%

-69.49%

+40.00%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-30.61%

-71.73%

+41.12%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-9.07%

-20.99%

+11.92%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.46%

-43.45%

+33.99%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.99%

4.59%

-0.60%

Volatility

FXH vs. QCLN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust Health Care AlphaDEX Fund (FXH) is 4.16%, while First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN) has a volatility of 12.56%. This indicates that FXH 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


FXHQCLNDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.16%

12.56%

-8.40%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.17%

26.02%

-14.85%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.75%

34.88%

-19.13%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.52%

37.97%

-21.45%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.47%

34.91%

-16.44%

FXH vs. QCLN - Expense Ratio Comparison

FXH has a 0.61% expense ratio, which is higher than QCLN's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

FXH vs. QCLN - Dividend Comparison

FXH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.85%, more than QCLN's 0.15% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FXH
First Trust Health Care AlphaDEX Fund
0.85%0.75%0.41%0.24%0.20%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


FXH and QCLN have a correlation of 0.33, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QCLN has higher volatility (12.56%) compared to FXH (4.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FXH dropped -43.70% vs QCLN's -76.18%.

On 10-year performance, QCLN leads with 17.39% vs 7.03% for FXH. On fees, QCLN is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, FXH has been the lower-risk option at 4.16%. 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 17.39% return vs 7.03%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

QCLN is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.61% for FXH.

FXH has the higher dividend yield at 0.85%, compared with 0.15% for QCLN.

FXH is categorized as Health & Biotech Equities, while QCLN is Alternative Energy Equities. FXH tracks StrataQuant Health Care Index, while QCLN tracks NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy. Their fees differ too: 0.61% for FXH and 0.60% for QCLN.

QCLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.49 vs 0.85), 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 FXH 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