QCLN vs. FAN

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

QCLN (First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund) and FAN (First Trust Global Wind Energy ETF) are both Alternative Energy Equities funds from First Trust - QCLN tracks the NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy while FAN tracks the ISE Clean Edge Global Wind Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, QCLN returned 17.14%/yr vs 9.75%/yr for FAN. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QCLN charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.62%/yr for FAN.

Performance

QCLN vs. FAN - 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 First Trust Global Wind Energy ETF (FAN). 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 FAN's 25.06% return. Over the past 10 years, QCLN has outperformed FAN with an annualized return of 17.14%, while FAN has yielded a comparatively lower 9.75% 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%

FAN

• 1D: -1.04%
• 1M: -5.50%
• YTD: 25.06%
• 6M: 28.38%
• 1Y: 48.35%
• 3Y*: 14.87%
• 5Y*: 5.26%
• 10Y*: 9.75%

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

QCLN vs. FAN - 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%
FAN First Trust Global Wind Energy ETF	25.06%	40.38%	-8.96%	-3.20%	-13.12%	-11.63%	61.16%	31.22%	-11.40%	16.30%

Correlation

The correlation between QCLN and FAN is 0.61, 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	0.61
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.65
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.65
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.61
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2008	0.62

The correlation between QCLN and FAN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.65 - a consistent structural relationship.

QCLN vs. FAN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QCLN	FAN
Industrials	30.2%	43.6%
Technology	20.8%	-
Energy	13.2%	1.2%
Utilities	13.2%	53.5%
Basic Materials	9.4%	0.2%
Consumer Cyclical	9.4%	1.5%
Financial Services	1.9%	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

QCLN vs. FAN — 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

FAN

FAN Risk / Return Rank: 79
FAN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
FAN Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
FAN Omega Ratio Rank: 69
FAN Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
FAN Martin Ratio Rank: 85

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. FAN - 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 First Trust Global Wind Energy ETF (FAN). 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	FAN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.42	2.45	+0.96
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.81	3.18	+0.62
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.47	1.41	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	7.48	6.30	+1.18
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	25.77	17.58	+8.20
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. FAN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QCLN Sharpe Ratio is 3.42, which is higher than the FAN Sharpe Ratio of 2.45. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QCLN and FAN, 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	FAN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.42	2.45	+0.96
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.05	0.25	-0.19
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.49	0.46	+0.03
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.20	0.05	+0.16

Drawdowns

QCLN vs. FAN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QCLN drawdown since its inception was -76.18%, roughly equal to the maximum FAN drawdown of -79.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QCLN and FAN.

Drawdown Indicators

	QCLN	FAN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-76.18%	-79.84%	+3.66%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.86%	-7.71%	-8.15%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-56.08%	-24.97%	-31.11%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-69.49%	-38.45%	-31.04%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-71.73%	-46.29%	-25.44%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-21.47%	-5.99%	-15.48%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-43.44%	-45.01%	+1.57%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.59%	2.76%	+1.83%

Volatility

QCLN vs. FAN - Volatility Comparison

First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN) has a higher volatility of 12.57% compared to First Trust Global Wind Energy ETF (FAN) at 6.48%. This indicates that QCLN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FAN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QCLN	FAN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.57%	6.48%	+6.09%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	26.03%	15.05%	+10.98%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	34.68%	19.81%	+14.87%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	37.96%	21.30%	+16.66%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	34.90%	21.06%	+13.84%

QCLN vs. FAN - Expense Ratio Comparison

QCLN has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than FAN's 0.62% expense ratio.

Dividends

QCLN vs. FAN - Dividend Comparison

QCLN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.15%, less than FAN's 0.99% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FAN First Trust Global Wind Energy ETF	0.99%	1.35%	1.52%	1.71%	1.50%	1.79%	0.84%	2.42%	2.67%	2.59%	6.04%	2.35%
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 FAN in my portfolio?

QCLN and FAN have a correlation of 0.61, 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 FAN?

QCLN has higher volatility (12.57%) compared to FAN (6.48%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QCLN dropped -76.18% vs FAN's -79.84%.

Which ETF is better, QCLN or FAN?

On 10-year performance, QCLN leads with 17.14% vs 9.75% for FAN. On fees, QCLN is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, FAN has been the lower-risk option at 6.48%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QCLN or FAN?

Over the 10-year period, QCLN has performed better with a 17.14% return vs 9.75%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QCLN or FAN?

QCLN is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.62% for FAN.

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

FAN has the higher dividend yield at 0.99%, compared with 0.15% for QCLN.

What is the main difference between QCLN and FAN?

QCLN tracks NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy, while FAN tracks ISE Clean Edge Global Wind Energy Index. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for QCLN and 0.62% for FAN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QCLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.42 vs 2.45), 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.