PBW vs. QCLN

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

PBW (Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF) and QCLN (First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund) are both Alternative Energy Equities funds - PBW tracks the The WilderHill Clean Energy Index (AMEX) while QCLN tracks the Nasdaq Clean Edge Green Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, PBW returned 7.09%/yr vs 13.08%/yr for QCLN. Their correlation of 0.91 means they have usually moved in the same direction. 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 5.86% return, which is significantly lower than QCLN's 10.48% return. Over the past 10 years, PBW has underperformed QCLN with an annualized return of 7.09%, while QCLN has yielded a comparatively higher 13.08% annualized return.

PBW

• 1D: 0.16%
• 1M: -12.22%
• 6M: -4.18%
• YTD: 5.86%
• 1Y: 46.40%
• 3Y*: -7.64%
• 5Y*: -15.46%
• 10Y*: 7.09%
• ALL TIME*: -2.58%

QCLN

• 1D: -0.26%
• 1M: -13.14%
• 6M: 0.01%
• YTD: 10.48%
• 1Y: 41.09%
• 3Y*: -2.29%
• 5Y*: -5.50%
• 10Y*: 13.08%
• ALL TIME*: 5.32%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
PBW Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF	$37.14M	$32.16M	$36.05M
QCLN First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund	$12.39M	$13.63M	$14.46M

PBW vs. QCLN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
PBW Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF	5.86%	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	10.48%	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 0.92, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.92
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.92
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.93
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	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	25.7%	25.3%
Technology	23.6%	43.0%
Basic Materials	16.3%	8.0%
Consumer Cyclical	15.3%	14.2%
Utilities	9.1%	7.9%
Energy	3.9%	0.1%
Consumer Defensive	2.1%	-
Financial Services	1.4%	1.5%
Communication Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

PBW vs. QCLN — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

PBW

PBW Risk / Return Rank: 38
PBW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 40
PBW Sortino Ratio Rank: 40
PBW Omega Ratio Rank: 38
PBW Calmar Ratio Rank: 35
PBW Martin Ratio Rank: 36

QCLN

QCLN Risk / Return Rank: 39
QCLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 40
QCLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
QCLN Omega Ratio Rank: 38
QCLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
QCLN Martin Ratio Rank: 42

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

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	0.98	0.99	-0.01
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.49	1.48	+0.01
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.18	1.18	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.20	1.25	-0.05
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.64	4.64	-1.00

PBW vs. QCLN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PBW Sharpe Ratio is 0.98, which is comparable to the QCLN Sharpe Ratio of 0.99. 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	-36.09%	-32.12%	-3.97%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-65.32%	-50.96%	-14.36%
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	-73.32%	-42.92%	-30.40%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-62.94%	-43.36%	-19.58%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	11.82%	8.62%	+3.20%

Volatility

PBW vs. QCLN - Volatility Comparison

Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW) and First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN) have volatilities of 14.90% and 15.14%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. 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	14.90%	15.14%	-0.24%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	33.63%	33.63%	0.00%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	44.14%	40.58%	+3.56%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	43.61%	38.97%	+4.64%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	39.25%	35.54%	+3.71%

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 1.47%, more than QCLN's 0.17% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
PBW Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF	1.47%	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	0.17%	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 0.92, 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 (15.14%) compared to PBW (14.90%). 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 13.08% vs 7.09% for PBW. On fees, QCLN is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, PBW has been the lower-risk option at 14.90%. 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 13.08% return vs 7.09%. 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 1.47%, compared with 0.17% for QCLN.

What is the main difference between PBW and QCLN?

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 (0.99 vs 0.98), 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.