QABA vs. QCLN

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

QABA (First Trust NASDAQ ABA Community Bank Index Fund) and QCLN (First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - QABA is a Financials Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ OMX ABA Community Bank Index, while QCLN is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, QABA returned 6.80%/yr vs 17.39%/yr for QCLN. At a 0.49 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.60% expense ratio.

Performance

QABA vs. QCLN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust NASDAQ ABA Community Bank Index Fund (QABA) 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, QABA achieves a 8.16% return, which is significantly lower than QCLN's 52.94% return. Over the past 10 years, QABA has underperformed QCLN with an annualized return of 6.80%, while QCLN has yielded a comparatively higher 17.39% annualized return.

QABA

• 1D: -2.39%
• 1M: -0.32%
• YTD: 8.16%
• 6M: 7.37%
• 1Y: 18.48%
• 3Y*: 17.46%
• 5Y*: 3.09%
• 10Y*: 6.80%

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)

QABA vs. QCLN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
QABA First Trust NASDAQ ABA Community Bank Index Fund	8.16%	4.62%	14.49%	-2.18%	-9.01%	34.20%	-10.70%	22.85%	-16.47%	0.75%
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 QABA and QCLN is 0.32, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.32
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.44
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.46
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.44
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 2, 2009	0.49

The correlation between QABA and QCLN shifts across timeframes, from 0.32 (1 year) to 0.49 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

QABA vs. QCLN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QABA	QCLN
Financial Services	99.7%	1.9%
Industrials	0.3%	30.2%
Basic Materials	-	9.4%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	9.4%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	13.2%
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	20.8%
Utilities	-	13.2%

Return for Risk

QABA vs. QCLN — Risk / Return Rank

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

QABA

QABA Risk / Return Rank: 26
QABA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 24
QABA Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
QABA Omega Ratio Rank: 24
QABA Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
QABA Martin Ratio Rank: 27

QCLN

QCLN Risk / Return Rank: 89
QCLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
QCLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
QCLN Omega Ratio Rank: 79
QCLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
QCLN Martin Ratio Rank: 94

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.

QABA vs. QCLN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust NASDAQ ABA Community Bank Index Fund (QABA) 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.

	QABA	QCLN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.83	3.49	-2.66
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.30	3.86	-2.56
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.16	1.48	-0.32
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.49	7.62	-6.14
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.69	26.28	-22.59
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QABA vs. QCLN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QABA Sharpe Ratio is 0.83, which is lower than the QCLN Sharpe Ratio of 3.49. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QABA 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	QABA	QCLN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.83	3.49	-2.66
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.12	0.06	+0.06
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.24	0.50	-0.26
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.34	0.20	+0.14

Drawdowns

QABA vs. QCLN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QABA drawdown since its inception was -49.30%, smaller than the maximum QCLN drawdown of -76.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QABA and QCLN.

Drawdown Indicators

	QABA	QCLN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-49.30%	-76.18%	+26.88%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.49%	-15.86%	+3.37%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.82%	-56.08%	+30.26%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-42.93%	-69.49%	+26.56%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-49.30%	-71.73%	+22.43%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.25%	-20.99%	+16.74%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.43%	-43.45%	+32.02%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.02%	4.59%	+0.43%

Volatility

QABA vs. QCLN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust NASDAQ ABA Community Bank Index Fund (QABA) is 5.63%, while First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN) has a volatility of 12.56%. This indicates that QABA 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

	QABA	QCLN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.63%	12.56%	-6.93%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.22%	26.02%	-10.80%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.50%	34.88%	-12.38%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	26.50%	37.97%	-11.47%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	28.69%	34.91%	-6.22%

QABA vs. QCLN - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both QABA and QCLN have an expense ratio of 0.60%.

Dividends

QABA vs. QCLN - Dividend Comparison

QABA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.40%, more than QCLN's 0.15% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
QABA First Trust NASDAQ ABA Community Bank Index Fund	2.40%	2.52%	2.37%	2.71%	2.10%	1.68%	2.55%	1.95%	1.90%	1.42%	1.13%	1.39%
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

Can I hold both QABA and QCLN in my portfolio?

QABA and QCLN have a correlation of 0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QABA or QCLN?

QCLN has higher volatility (12.56%) compared to QABA (5.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QABA dropped -49.30% vs QCLN's -76.18%.

Which ETF is better, QABA or QCLN?

On 10-year performance, QCLN leads with 17.39% vs 6.80% for QABA. Both ETFs have the same 0.60% expense ratio. On volatility, QABA has been the lower-risk option at 5.63%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QABA or QCLN?

Over the 10-year period, QCLN has performed better with a 17.39% return vs 6.80%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QABA or QCLN?

QABA and QCLN have the same expense ratio: 0.60% per year.

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

QABA has the higher dividend yield at 2.40%, compared with 0.15% for QCLN.

What is the main difference between QABA and QCLN?

QABA is categorized as Financials Equities, while QCLN is Alternative Energy Equities. QABA tracks NASDAQ OMX ABA Community Bank Index, while QCLN tracks NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QCLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.49 vs 0.83), 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.