ISHP vs. QCLN
ISHP (First Trust S-Network Global E-Commerce ETF) and QCLN (First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - ISHP is a Consumer Discretionary Equities fund tracking the S-Network Global E-Commerce Index, while QCLN is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the Nasdaq Clean Edge Green Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ISHP returned 2.17%/yr vs -2.94%/yr for QCLN. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ISHP charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for QCLN.
Performance
ISHP vs. QCLN - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ISHP achieves a -9.43% return, which is significantly lower than QCLN's 17.05% return.
ISHP
- 1D
- 0.49%
- 1M
- 3.63%
- 6M
- -12.02%
- YTD
- -9.43%
- 1Y
- -10.08%
- 3Y*
- 8.59%
- 5Y*
- 2.17%
- 10Y*
- —
QCLN
- 1D
- -4.73%
- 1M
- -15.37%
- 6M
- 5.79%
- YTD
- 17.05%
- 1Y
- 49.81%
- 3Y*
- -2.01%
- 5Y*
- -2.94%
- 10Y*
- 13.92%
ISHP vs. QCLN - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ISHP First Trust S-Network Global E-Commerce ETF | -9.43% | 12.27% | 24.17% | 22.24% | -33.79% | 30.09% | 15.33% | 19.74% | -2.04% | 7.66% |
QCLN First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund | 17.05% | 31.81% | -18.86% | -10.02% | -30.37% | -3.21% | 184.00% | 42.65% | -12.38% | 32.34% |
Correlation
The correlation between ISHP and QCLN is 0.41, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.41 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.55 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.57 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 11, 2016 | 0.52 |
The correlation between ISHP and QCLN shifts across timeframes, from 0.41 (1 year) to 0.57 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
ISHP vs. QCLN - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
ISHP
QCLN
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
-
Industrials
Technology
Real Estate
-
Healthcare
-
Financial Services
Consumer Defensive
-
Basic Materials
-
Energy
-
Utilities
-
Consumer Cyclical
ISHP
QCLN
Communication Services
ISHP
QCLN
-
Industrials
ISHP
QCLN
Technology
ISHP
QCLN
Real Estate
ISHP
QCLN
-
Healthcare
ISHP
QCLN
-
Financial Services
ISHP
QCLN
Consumer Defensive
ISHP
QCLN
-
Basic Materials
ISHP
-
QCLN
Energy
ISHP
-
QCLN
Utilities
ISHP
-
QCLN
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
ISHP vs. QCLN — Risk / Return Rank
ISHP
QCLN
ISHP vs. QCLN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust S-Network Global E-Commerce ETF (ISHP) 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.
| ISHP | QCLN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.83 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.44 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.92 | 1.22 | -0.30 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.41 | 2.11 | -2.51 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.75 | 7.47 | -8.23 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ISHP vs. QCLN - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ISHP drawdown since its inception was -47.57%, smaller than the maximum QCLN drawdown of -76.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ISHP and QCLN.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ISHP | QCLN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -47.57% | -76.18% | +28.61% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -24.75% | -23.78% | -0.97% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -24.75% | -56.08% | +31.33% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -47.57% | -69.49% | +21.92% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -71.73% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -16.79% | -39.53% | +22.74% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.74% | -43.37% | +30.63% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 13.40% | 6.68% | +6.72% |
Volatility
ISHP vs. QCLN - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for First Trust S-Network Global E-Commerce ETF (ISHP) is 5.05%, while First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN) has a volatility of 16.47%. This indicates that ISHP 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
| ISHP | QCLN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.05% | 16.47% | -11.42% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.34% | 32.45% | -18.11% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.83% | 39.56% | -21.73% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 27.29% | 38.88% | -11.59% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.03% | 35.41% | -11.38% |
ISHP vs. QCLN - Expense Ratio Comparison
ISHP has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than QCLN's 0.59% expense ratio.
Dividends
ISHP vs. QCLN - Dividend Comparison
ISHP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.15%, more than QCLN's 0.16% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ISHP First Trust S-Network Global E-Commerce ETF | 1.15% | 1.34% | 1.02% | 1.58% | 0.76% | 0.53% | 0.82% | 1.16% | 0.89% | 1.65% | 0.23% | 0.00% |
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
ISHP and QCLN have a correlation of 0.41, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
QCLN has higher volatility (16.47%) compared to ISHP (5.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ISHP dropped -47.57% vs QCLN's -76.18%.
On 5-year performance, ISHP leads with 2.17% vs -2.94% for QCLN. On fees, QCLN is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, ISHP has been the lower-risk option at 5.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, ISHP has performed better with a 2.17% return vs -2.94%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QCLN is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for ISHP.
ISHP has the higher dividend yield at 1.15%, compared with 0.16% for QCLN.
ISHP is categorized as Consumer Discretionary Equities, while QCLN is Alternative Energy Equities. ISHP tracks S-Network Global E-Commerce Index, while QCLN tracks Nasdaq Clean Edge Green Energy Index. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for ISHP and 0.59% for QCLN.
QCLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.27 vs -0.57), 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.
Find the right allocation for ISHP 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