PAVE vs. QCLN
PAVE (Global X US Infrastructure Development ETF) and QCLN (First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - PAVE is a Industrials Equities fund tracking the INDXX U.S. Infrastructure Development Index, while QCLN is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, PAVE returned 17.84%/yr vs -0.62%/yr for QCLN. A 0.64 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PAVE charges 0.47%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for QCLN.
Performance
PAVE vs. QCLN - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PAVE achieves a 20.86% return, which is significantly lower than QCLN's 37.91% return.
PAVE
- 1D
- 1.01%
- 1M
- 1.64%
- YTD
- 20.86%
- 6M
- 18.50%
- 1Y
- 38.94%
- 3Y*
- 25.14%
- 5Y*
- 17.84%
- 10Y*
- —
QCLN
- 1D
- 1.67%
- 1M
- -2.49%
- YTD
- 37.91%
- 6M
- 35.67%
- 1Y
- 90.42%
- 3Y*
- 6.19%
- 5Y*
- -0.62%
- 10Y*
- 16.43%
PAVE vs. QCLN - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PAVE Global X US Infrastructure Development ETF | 20.86% | 19.36% | 17.92% | 31.01% | -7.17% | 36.42% | 19.72% | 33.26% | -19.15% | 13.41% |
QCLN First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund | 37.91% | 31.81% | -18.86% | -10.02% | -30.37% | -3.21% | 184.00% | 42.65% | -12.38% | 24.46% |
Correlation
The correlation between PAVE and QCLN is 0.67, 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 | 0.67 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.66 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.66 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 8, 2017 | 0.64 |
The correlation between PAVE and QCLN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.64 to 0.67 - a consistent structural relationship.
PAVE vs. QCLN - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
PAVE
QCLN
Industrials
Basic Materials
Utilities
Technology
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Industrials
PAVE
QCLN
Basic Materials
PAVE
QCLN
Utilities
PAVE
QCLN
Technology
PAVE
QCLN
Consumer Defensive
PAVE
QCLN
-
Energy
PAVE
QCLN
Communication Services
PAVE
-
QCLN
-
Consumer Cyclical
PAVE
-
QCLN
Financial Services
PAVE
-
QCLN
Healthcare
PAVE
-
QCLN
-
Real Estate
PAVE
-
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
PAVE vs. QCLN — Risk / Return Rank
PAVE
QCLN
PAVE vs. QCLN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X US Infrastructure Development ETF (PAVE) 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.
| PAVE | QCLN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.56 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.20 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.32 | 1.37 | -0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.11 | 5.51 | -2.39 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.32 | 18.21 | -6.89 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
PAVE vs. QCLN - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PAVE drawdown since its inception was -44.08%, smaller than the maximum QCLN drawdown of -76.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PAVE and QCLN.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PAVE | QCLN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -44.08% | -76.18% | +32.10% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.91% | -16.40% | +4.49% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -26.23% | -56.08% | +29.85% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -26.23% | -69.49% | +43.26% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -71.73% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.01% | -28.75% | +27.74% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.23% | -43.42% | +37.19% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.27% | 4.95% | -1.68% |
Volatility
PAVE vs. QCLN - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Global X US Infrastructure Development ETF (PAVE) is 7.35%, while First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN) has a volatility of 16.96%. This indicates that PAVE 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
| PAVE | QCLN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.35% | 16.96% | -9.61% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.87% | 28.95% | -13.08% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.49% | 36.71% | -17.22% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.70% | 38.33% | -16.63% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.40% | 35.10% | -10.70% |
PAVE vs. QCLN - Expense Ratio Comparison
PAVE has a 0.47% expense ratio, which is lower than QCLN's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
PAVE vs. QCLN - Dividend Comparison
PAVE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.76%, more than QCLN's 0.16% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PAVE Global X US Infrastructure Development ETF | 0.76% | 0.92% | 0.54% | 0.68% | 0.84% | 0.48% | 0.44% | 0.67% | 0.78% | 0.30% | 0.00% | 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
PAVE and QCLN have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
QCLN has higher volatility (16.96%) compared to PAVE (7.35%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PAVE dropped -44.08% vs QCLN's -76.18%.
On 5-year performance, PAVE leads with 17.84% vs -0.62% for QCLN. On fees, PAVE is cheaper at 0.47% per year. On volatility, PAVE has been the lower-risk option at 7.35%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, PAVE has performed better with a 17.84% return vs -0.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PAVE is cheaper with a 0.47% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for QCLN.
PAVE has the higher dividend yield at 0.76%, compared with 0.16% for QCLN.
PAVE is categorized as Industrials Equities, while QCLN is Alternative Energy Equities. PAVE tracks INDXX U.S. Infrastructure Development Index, while QCLN tracks NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy. They also come from different issuers: Global X and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.47% for PAVE and 0.60% for QCLN.
QCLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.46 vs 1.90), 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 PAVE 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