QCLN vs. EFA

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

QCLN (First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund) and EFA (iShares MSCI EAFE ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QCLN is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy, while EFA is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund tracking the MSCI EAFE Index (Net). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, QCLN returned 16.43%/yr vs 9.84%/yr for EFA. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QCLN charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.32%/yr for EFA.

Performance

QCLN vs. EFA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN) and iShares MSCI EAFE ETF (EFA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QCLN achieves a 37.91% return, which is significantly higher than EFA's 9.36% return. Over the past 10 years, QCLN has outperformed EFA with an annualized return of 16.43%, while EFA has yielded a comparatively lower 9.84% annualized return.

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%

EFA

• 1D: 0.28%
• 1M: 1.51%
• YTD: 9.36%
• 6M: 10.80%
• 1Y: 21.90%
• 3Y*: 16.14%
• 5Y*: 8.36%
• 10Y*: 9.84%

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

QCLN vs. EFA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
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%	32.34%
EFA iShares MSCI EAFE ETF	9.36%	31.55%	3.49%	18.36%	-14.39%	11.45%	7.60%	22.04%	-13.82%	25.07%

Correlation

The correlation between QCLN and EFA is 0.54, 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	0.54
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.58
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.61
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.60
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 14, 2007	0.63

The correlation between QCLN and EFA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.54 to 0.63 - a consistent structural relationship.

QCLN vs. EFA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QCLN	EFA
Technology	47.6%	12.1%
Industrials	24.8%	18.9%
Consumer Cyclical	10.2%	7.4%
Utilities	8.1%	3.7%
Basic Materials	7.8%	6.2%
Financial Services	1.4%	24.1%
Energy	0.1%	3.8%
Communication Services	-	4.6%
Consumer Defensive	-	6.7%
Healthcare	-	10.1%
Real Estate	-	1.6%

Return for Risk

QCLN vs. EFA — Risk / Return Rank

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

QCLN

QCLN Risk / Return Rank: 83
QCLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
QCLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
QCLN Omega Ratio Rank: 73
QCLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
QCLN Martin Ratio Rank: 90

EFA

EFA Risk / Return Rank: 42
EFA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 42
EFA Sortino Ratio Rank: 42
EFA Omega Ratio Rank: 41
EFA Calmar Ratio Rank: 40
EFA Martin Ratio Rank: 46

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.

QCLN vs. EFA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN) and iShares MSCI EAFE ETF (EFA). 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.

	QCLN	EFA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.46	1.31	+1.15
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.89	1.91	+0.98
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.24	+0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.51	1.79	+3.72
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	18.21	6.67	+11.54

QCLN vs. EFA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QCLN Sharpe Ratio is 2.46, which is higher than the EFA Sharpe Ratio of 1.31. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QCLN and EFA, 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

QCLN vs. EFA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QCLN drawdown since its inception was -76.18%, which is greater than EFA's maximum drawdown of -61.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QCLN and EFA.

Drawdown Indicators

	QCLN	EFA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-76.18%	-61.04%	-15.14%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.40%	-11.42%	-4.98%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-56.08%	-14.05%	-42.03%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-69.49%	-29.53%	-39.96%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-71.73%	-34.19%	-37.54%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-28.75%	-0.61%	-28.14%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-43.42%	-11.92%	-31.50%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.95%	3.07%	+1.88%

Volatility

QCLN vs. EFA - Volatility Comparison

First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN) has a higher volatility of 16.96% compared to iShares MSCI EAFE ETF (EFA) at 5.50%. This indicates that QCLN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EFA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QCLN	EFA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	16.96%	5.50%	+11.46%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	28.95%	13.19%	+15.76%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	36.71%	15.64%	+21.07%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	38.33%	16.58%	+21.75%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	35.10%	17.27%	+17.83%

QCLN vs. EFA - Expense Ratio Comparison

QCLN has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than EFA's 0.32% expense ratio.

Dividends

QCLN vs. EFA - Dividend Comparison

QCLN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.16%, less than EFA's 3.09% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EFA iShares MSCI EAFE ETF	3.09%	3.38%	3.24%	2.98%	2.69%	3.33%	2.13%	3.10%	3.39%	2.57%	3.07%	2.76%
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 QCLN and EFA in my portfolio?

QCLN and EFA have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QCLN or EFA?

QCLN has higher volatility (16.96%) compared to EFA (5.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QCLN dropped -76.18% vs EFA's -61.04%.

Which ETF is better, QCLN or EFA?

On 10-year performance, QCLN leads with 16.43% vs 9.84% for EFA. On fees, EFA is cheaper at 0.32% per year. On volatility, EFA has been the lower-risk option at 5.50%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QCLN or EFA?

Over the 10-year period, QCLN has performed better with a 16.43% return vs 9.84%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QCLN or EFA?

EFA is cheaper with a 0.32% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for QCLN.

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

EFA has the higher dividend yield at 3.09%, compared with 0.16% for QCLN.

What is the main difference between QCLN and EFA?

QCLN is categorized as Alternative Energy Equities, while EFA is Foreign Large Cap Equities. QCLN tracks NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy, while EFA tracks MSCI EAFE Index (Net). They also come from different issuers: First Trust and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for QCLN and 0.32% for EFA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QCLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.46 vs 1.31), 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.