QCLN vs. PAVE
QCLN (First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund) and PAVE (Global X US Infrastructure Development ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QCLN is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy, while PAVE is a Industrials Equities fund tracking the INDXX U.S. Infrastructure Development Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, QCLN returned -0.62%/yr vs 17.84%/yr for PAVE. A 0.64 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QCLN charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.47%/yr for PAVE.
Performance
QCLN vs. PAVE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QCLN achieves a 37.91% return, which is significantly higher than PAVE's 20.86% 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%
PAVE
- 1D
- 1.01%
- 1M
- 1.64%
- YTD
- 20.86%
- 6M
- 18.50%
- 1Y
- 38.94%
- 3Y*
- 25.14%
- 5Y*
- 17.84%
- 10Y*
- —
QCLN vs. PAVE - 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% | 24.46% |
PAVE Global X US Infrastructure Development ETF | 20.86% | 19.36% | 17.92% | 31.01% | -7.17% | 36.42% | 19.72% | 33.26% | -19.15% | 13.41% |
Correlation
The correlation between QCLN and PAVE is 0.67, 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 | 0.67 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.66 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.66 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 8, 2017 | 0.64 |
The correlation between QCLN and PAVE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.64 to 0.67 - a consistent structural relationship.
QCLN vs. PAVE - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
QCLN
PAVE
Technology
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
-
Utilities
Basic Materials
Financial Services
-
Energy
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Healthcare
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
QCLN
PAVE
Industrials
QCLN
PAVE
Consumer Cyclical
QCLN
PAVE
-
Utilities
QCLN
PAVE
Basic Materials
QCLN
PAVE
Financial Services
QCLN
PAVE
-
Energy
QCLN
PAVE
Communication Services
QCLN
-
PAVE
-
Consumer Defensive
QCLN
-
PAVE
Healthcare
QCLN
-
PAVE
-
Real Estate
QCLN
-
PAVE
-
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. PAVE — Risk / Return Rank
QCLN
PAVE
QCLN vs. PAVE - 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 Global X US Infrastructure Development ETF (PAVE). 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 | PAVE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.56 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.20 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.37 | 1.32 | +0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.51 | 3.11 | +2.39 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 18.21 | 11.32 | +6.89 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
QCLN vs. PAVE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QCLN drawdown since its inception was -76.18%, which is greater than PAVE's maximum drawdown of -44.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QCLN and PAVE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QCLN | PAVE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -76.18% | -44.08% | -32.10% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -16.40% | -11.91% | -4.49% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -56.08% | -26.23% | -29.85% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -69.49% | -26.23% | -43.26% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -71.73% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -28.75% | -1.01% | -27.74% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -43.42% | -6.23% | -37.19% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.95% | 3.27% | +1.68% |
Volatility
QCLN vs. PAVE - Volatility Comparison
First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN) has a higher volatility of 16.96% compared to Global X US Infrastructure Development ETF (PAVE) at 7.35%. This indicates that QCLN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PAVE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QCLN | PAVE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 16.96% | 7.35% | +9.61% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 28.95% | 15.87% | +13.08% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 36.71% | 19.49% | +17.22% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 38.33% | 21.70% | +16.63% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 35.10% | 24.40% | +10.70% |
QCLN vs. PAVE - Expense Ratio Comparison
QCLN has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than PAVE's 0.47% expense ratio.
Dividends
QCLN vs. PAVE - Dividend Comparison
QCLN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.16%, less than PAVE's 0.76% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PAVE Global X US Infrastructure Development ETF | 0.76% | 0.92% | 0.54% | 0.68% | 0.84% | 0.48% | 0.44% | 0.67% | 0.78% | 0.30% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
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 PAVE have a correlation of 0.67, 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 PAVE (7.35%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QCLN dropped -76.18% vs PAVE's -44.08%.
On 5-year performance, PAVE leads with 17.84% vs -0.62% for QCLN. On fees, PAVE is cheaper at 0.47% per year. On volatility, PAVE has been the lower-risk option at 7.35%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, PAVE has performed better with a 17.84% return vs -0.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PAVE is cheaper with a 0.47% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for QCLN.
PAVE has the higher dividend yield at 0.76%, compared with 0.16% for QCLN.
QCLN is categorized as Alternative Energy Equities, while PAVE is Industrials Equities. QCLN tracks NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy, while PAVE tracks INDXX U.S. Infrastructure Development Index. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for QCLN and 0.47% for PAVE.
QCLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.46 vs 1.90), 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.
Find the right allocation for QCLN and PAVE
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