PBW vs. QCLN

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

PBW (Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF) and QCLN (First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - PBW is a Small Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the The WilderHill Clean Energy Index (AMEX), while QCLN is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the Nasdaq Clean Edge Green Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, PBW returned 7.70%/yr vs 14.37%/yr for QCLN. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. PBW charges 0.61%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for QCLN.

Performance

PBW vs. QCLN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW) 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, PBW achieves a 12.09% return, which is significantly lower than QCLN's 20.15% return. Over the past 10 years, PBW has underperformed QCLN with an annualized return of 7.70%, while QCLN has yielded a comparatively higher 14.37% annualized return.

PBW

• 1D: -3.46%
• 1M: -14.83%
• 6M: -0.86%
• YTD: 12.09%
• 1Y: 55.86%
• 3Y*: -4.93%
• 5Y*: -14.27%
• 10Y*: 7.70%

QCLN

• 1D: -3.82%
• 1M: -12.88%
• 6M: 9.07%
• YTD: 20.15%
• 1Y: 54.85%
• 3Y*: -0.11%
• 5Y*: -2.97%
• 10Y*: 14.37%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

PBW vs. QCLN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
PBW Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF	12.09%	53.96%	-30.77%	-20.03%	-44.55%	-29.86%	204.82%	62.58%	-14.11%	39.92%
QCLN First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund	20.15%	31.81%	-18.86%	-10.02%	-30.37%	-3.21%	184.00%	42.65%	-12.38%	32.34%

Correlation

The correlation between PBW and QCLN is 0.91, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.91
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.92
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.93
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.92
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 14, 2007	0.91

The correlation between PBW and QCLN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

PBW vs. QCLN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PBW	QCLN
Industrials	28.0%	24.8%
Basic Materials	13.5%	7.8%
Energy	12.9%	0.1%
Consumer Cyclical	12.7%	10.2%
Technology	9.9%	47.6%
Utilities	8.4%	8.1%
Consumer Defensive	1.6%	-
Financial Services	1.3%	1.4%
Communication Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

PBW vs. QCLN — Risk / Return Rank

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

PBW

PBW Risk / Return Rank: 45
PBW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 46
PBW Sortino Ratio Rank: 43
PBW Omega Ratio Rank: 41
PBW Calmar Ratio Rank: 52
PBW Martin Ratio Rank: 45

QCLN

QCLN Risk / Return Rank: 54
QCLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 51
QCLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 47
QCLN Omega Ratio Rank: 46
QCLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
QCLN Martin Ratio Rank: 62

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.

PBW vs. QCLN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW) 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.

	PBW	QCLN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.30	1.41	-0.10
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.81	1.90	-0.09
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.24	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.06	2.53	-0.47
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.82	8.78	-2.95

PBW vs. QCLN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PBW Sharpe Ratio is 1.30, which is comparable to the QCLN Sharpe Ratio of 1.41. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PBW 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.

Drawdowns

PBW vs. QCLN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PBW drawdown since its inception was -89.02%, which is greater than QCLN's maximum drawdown of -76.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PBW and QCLN.

Drawdown Indicators

	PBW	QCLN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-89.02%	-76.18%	-12.84%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-27.22%	-21.76%	-5.46%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-68.04%	-56.08%	-11.96%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-84.50%	-69.49%	-15.01%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-89.02%	-71.73%	-17.29%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-71.75%	-37.93%	-33.82%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-62.92%	-43.37%	-19.55%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	9.62%	6.27%	+3.35%

Volatility

PBW vs. QCLN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW) is 14.18%, while First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN) has a volatility of 17.41%. This indicates that PBW 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

	PBW	QCLN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	14.18%	17.41%	-3.23%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	32.08%	32.06%	+0.02%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	43.18%	39.27%	+3.91%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	43.54%	38.85%	+4.69%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	39.09%	35.39%	+3.70%

PBW vs. QCLN - Expense Ratio Comparison

PBW has a 0.61% expense ratio, which is higher than QCLN's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

PBW vs. QCLN - Dividend Comparison

PBW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.39%, more than QCLN's 0.16% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
PBW Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF	1.39%	0.79%	2.84%	3.68%	4.21%	1.71%	0.44%	1.45%	2.04%	1.28%	2.68%	1.53%
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

Can I hold both PBW and QCLN in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, PBW and QCLN move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, PBW or QCLN?

QCLN has higher volatility (17.41%) compared to PBW (14.18%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PBW dropped -89.02% vs QCLN's -76.18%.

Which ETF is better, PBW or QCLN?

On 10-year performance, QCLN leads with 14.37% vs 7.70% for PBW. On fees, QCLN is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, PBW has been the lower-risk option at 14.18%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PBW or QCLN?

Over the 10-year period, QCLN has performed better with a 14.37% return vs 7.70%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PBW or QCLN?

QCLN is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.61% for PBW.

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

PBW has the higher dividend yield at 1.39%, compared with 0.16% for QCLN.

What is the main difference between PBW and QCLN?

PBW is categorized as Small Cap Growth Equities, while QCLN is Alternative Energy Equities. PBW tracks The WilderHill Clean Energy Index (AMEX), while QCLN tracks Nasdaq Clean Edge Green Energy Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.61% for PBW and 0.59% for QCLN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QCLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.41 vs 1.30), 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.