QCLN vs. ERTH

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

QCLN (First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund) and ERTH (Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF) are both Alternative Energy Equities funds - QCLN tracks the NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy while ERTH tracks the MSCI Global Environment Select Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, QCLN returned 17.14%/yr vs 7.33%/yr for ERTH. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. QCLN charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for ERTH.

Performance

QCLN vs. ERTH - 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 Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF (ERTH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QCLN achieves a 52.00% return, which is significantly higher than ERTH's 7.61% return. Over the past 10 years, QCLN has outperformed ERTH with an annualized return of 17.14%, while ERTH has yielded a comparatively lower 7.33% annualized return.

QCLN

• 1D: -0.62%
• 1M: 13.54%
• YTD: 52.00%
• 6M: 46.53%
• 1Y: 117.87%
• 3Y*: 12.00%
• 5Y*: 2.04%
• 10Y*: 17.14%

ERTH

• 1D: -0.38%
• 1M: 1.95%
• YTD: 7.61%
• 6M: 8.52%
• 1Y: 21.38%
• 3Y*: 3.35%
• 5Y*: -3.83%
• 10Y*: 7.33%

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

QCLN vs. ERTH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
QCLN First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund	52.00%	31.81%	-18.86%	-10.02%	-30.37%	-3.21%	184.00%	42.65%	-12.38%	32.34%
ERTH Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF	7.61%	18.47%	-13.56%	0.12%	-27.59%	2.64%	51.02%	36.78%	-12.49%	30.53%

Correlation

The correlation between QCLN and ERTH is 0.80, 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	0.80
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.86
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.89
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.85
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 15, 2007	0.82

The correlation between QCLN and ERTH has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

QCLN vs. ERTH - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QCLN	ERTH
Industrials	30.2%	21.0%
Technology	20.8%	10.5%
Energy	13.2%	8.5%
Utilities	13.2%	6.5%
Basic Materials	9.4%	2.3%
Consumer Cyclical	9.4%	14.3%
Financial Services	1.9%	0.3%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	2.1%
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	26.7%

Return for Risk

QCLN vs. ERTH — Risk / Return Rank

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

QCLN

QCLN Risk / Return Rank: 89
QCLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
QCLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
QCLN Omega Ratio Rank: 80
QCLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
QCLN Martin Ratio Rank: 93

ERTH

ERTH Risk / Return Rank: 42
ERTH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
ERTH Sortino Ratio Rank: 36
ERTH Omega Ratio Rank: 34
ERTH Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
ERTH 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. ERTH - 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 Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF (ERTH). 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.

	QCLN	ERTH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.42	1.29	+2.13
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.81	1.84	+1.96
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.47	1.23	+0.25
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	7.48	2.66	+4.81
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	25.77	7.39	+18.39
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QCLN vs. ERTH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QCLN Sharpe Ratio is 3.42, which is higher than the ERTH Sharpe Ratio of 1.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QCLN and ERTH, 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

	QCLN	ERTH	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.42	1.29	+2.13
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.05	-0.17	+0.22
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.49	0.32	+0.17
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.20	0.20	0.00

Drawdowns

QCLN vs. ERTH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QCLN drawdown since its inception was -76.18%, which is greater than ERTH's maximum drawdown of -64.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QCLN and ERTH.

Drawdown Indicators

	QCLN	ERTH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-76.18%	-64.45%	-11.73%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.86%	-8.07%	-7.79%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-56.08%	-33.82%	-22.26%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-69.49%	-51.72%	-17.77%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-71.73%	-51.72%	-20.01%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-21.47%	-27.51%	+6.04%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-43.44%	-21.47%	-21.97%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.59%	2.90%	+1.69%

Volatility

QCLN vs. ERTH - Volatility Comparison

First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN) has a higher volatility of 12.57% compared to Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF (ERTH) at 5.18%. This indicates that QCLN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ERTH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QCLN	ERTH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.57%	5.18%	+7.39%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	26.03%	11.81%	+14.22%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	34.68%	16.70%	+17.98%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	37.96%	22.84%	+15.12%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	34.90%	22.62%	+12.28%

QCLN vs. ERTH - Expense Ratio Comparison

QCLN has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than ERTH's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

QCLN vs. ERTH - Dividend Comparison

QCLN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.15%, less than ERTH's 1.39% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ERTH Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF	1.39%	1.46%	1.00%	1.28%	1.22%	15.33%	0.21%	0.71%	0.61%	0.87%	1.06%	0.79%
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 QCLN and ERTH in my portfolio?

QCLN and ERTH have a correlation of 0.80, 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 ERTH?

QCLN has higher volatility (12.57%) compared to ERTH (5.18%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QCLN dropped -76.18% vs ERTH's -64.45%.

Which ETF is better, QCLN or ERTH?

On 10-year performance, QCLN leads with 17.14% vs 7.33% for ERTH. On fees, ERTH is cheaper at 0.55% per year. On volatility, ERTH has been the lower-risk option at 5.18%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QCLN or ERTH?

Over the 10-year period, QCLN has performed better with a 17.14% return vs 7.33%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QCLN or ERTH?

ERTH is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for QCLN.

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

ERTH has the higher dividend yield at 1.39%, compared with 0.15% for QCLN.

What is the main difference between QCLN and ERTH?

QCLN tracks NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy, while ERTH tracks MSCI Global Environment Select Index. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for QCLN and 0.55% for ERTH.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QCLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.42 vs 1.29), 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.