PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
QCLN vs. FNDF
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

QCLN vs. FNDF - 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 Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF (FNDF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QCLN achieves a 37.91% return, which is significantly higher than FNDF's 19.66% return. Over the past 10 years, QCLN has outperformed FNDF with an annualized return of 16.43%, while FNDF has yielded a comparatively lower 12.34% 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%

FNDF

1D
0.39%
1M
0.88%
YTD
19.66%
6M
21.60%
1Y
41.60%
3Y*
22.69%
5Y*
13.11%
10Y*
12.34%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QCLN vs. FNDF - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
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%
FNDF
Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF
19.66%40.99%2.29%20.22%-7.78%14.97%3.61%18.46%-14.21%23.98%

Correlation

The correlation between QCLN and FNDF is 0.55, 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

0.55

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.58

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.59

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.58

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 15, 2013

0.58

The correlation between QCLN and FNDF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.55 to 0.59 - a consistent structural relationship.

QCLN vs. FNDF - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
QCLN
FNDF

Technology

47.6%
14.4%

Industrials

24.8%
15.5%

Consumer Cyclical

10.2%
10.8%

Utilities

8.1%
3.5%

Basic Materials

7.8%
11.3%

Financial Services

1.4%
16.2%

Energy

0.1%
10.9%

Communication Services

-

4.9%

Consumer Defensive

-

6.5%

Healthcare

-

5.2%

Real Estate

-

0.8%

Technology

QCLN
47.6%
FNDF
14.4%

Industrials

QCLN
24.8%
FNDF
15.5%

Consumer Cyclical

QCLN
10.2%
FNDF
10.8%

Utilities

QCLN
8.1%
FNDF
3.5%

Basic Materials

QCLN
7.8%
FNDF
11.3%

Financial Services

QCLN
1.4%
FNDF
16.2%

Energy

QCLN
0.1%
FNDF
10.9%

Communication Services

QCLN

-

FNDF
4.9%

Consumer Defensive

QCLN

-

FNDF
6.5%

Healthcare

QCLN

-

FNDF
5.2%

Real Estate

QCLN

-

FNDF
0.8%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

QCLN vs. FNDF — Risk / Return Rank

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

QCLN
QCLN Risk / Return Rank: 8383
Overall Rank
QCLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QCLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 7575
Sortino Ratio Rank
QCLN Omega Ratio Rank: 7373
Omega Ratio Rank
QCLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 9292
Calmar Ratio Rank
QCLN Martin Ratio Rank: 9090
Martin Ratio Rank

FNDF
FNDF Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
FNDF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FNDF Sortino Ratio Rank: 8585
Sortino Ratio Rank
FNDF Omega Ratio Rank: 8686
Omega Ratio Rank
FNDF Calmar Ratio Rank: 8282
Calmar Ratio Rank
FNDF Martin Ratio Rank: 8282
Martin Ratio Rank
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. FNDF - 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 Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF (FNDF). 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.


QCLNFNDFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.07

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.41

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.37

1.45

-0.09

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.51

3.82

+1.69

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

18.21

14.27

+3.94

QCLN vs. FNDF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QCLN Sharpe Ratio is 2.46, which is comparable to the FNDF Sharpe Ratio of 2.53. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QCLN and FNDF, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

QCLN vs. FNDF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QCLN drawdown since its inception was -76.18%, which is greater than FNDF's maximum drawdown of -40.14%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QCLN and FNDF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QCLNFNDFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-76.18%

-40.14%

-36.04%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-16.40%

-10.60%

-5.80%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-56.08%

-13.89%

-42.19%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-69.49%

-25.56%

-43.93%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-71.73%

-40.14%

-31.59%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-28.75%

-1.94%

-26.81%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-43.42%

-7.63%

-35.79%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.95%

2.84%

+2.11%

Volatility

QCLN vs. FNDF - Volatility Comparison

First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN) has a higher volatility of 16.96% compared to Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF (FNDF) at 6.65%. This indicates that QCLN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FNDF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QCLNFNDFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

16.96%

6.65%

+10.31%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

28.95%

13.64%

+15.31%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

36.71%

16.00%

+20.71%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

38.33%

16.35%

+21.98%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

35.10%

17.71%

+17.39%

QCLN vs. FNDF - Expense Ratio Comparison

QCLN has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than FNDF's 0.25% expense ratio.


Dividends

QCLN vs. FNDF - Dividend Comparison

QCLN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.16%, less than FNDF's 2.87% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FNDF
Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF
2.87%3.44%4.01%3.41%3.10%3.54%2.17%3.20%3.47%2.32%2.42%2.08%
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


QCLN and FNDF have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QCLN has higher volatility (16.96%) compared to FNDF (6.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QCLN dropped -76.18% vs FNDF's -40.14%.

On 10-year performance, QCLN leads with 16.43% vs 12.34% for FNDF. On fees, FNDF is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, FNDF has been the lower-risk option at 6.65%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, QCLN has performed better with a 16.43% return vs 12.34%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FNDF is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for QCLN.

FNDF has the higher dividend yield at 2.87%, compared with 0.16% for QCLN.

QCLN is categorized as Alternative Energy Equities, while FNDF is Foreign Large Cap Equities. QCLN tracks NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy, while FNDF tracks RAFI Fundamental High Liquidity Developed ex US Large Index (Net). They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for QCLN and 0.25% for FNDF.

FNDF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.53 vs 2.46), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for QCLN and FNDF

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer