QCLN vs. PBW

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

QCLN (First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund) and PBW (Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF) are both Alternative Energy Equities funds - QCLN tracks the Nasdaq Clean Edge Green Energy Index while PBW tracks the The WilderHill Clean Energy Index (AMEX). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, QCLN returned 13.08%/yr vs 7.09%/yr for PBW. Their correlation of 0.91 means they have usually moved in the same direction. QCLN charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.61%/yr for PBW.

Performance

QCLN vs. PBW - 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 WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QCLN achieves a 10.48% return, which is significantly higher than PBW's 5.86% return. Over the past 10 years, QCLN has outperformed PBW with an annualized return of 13.08%, while PBW has yielded a comparatively lower 7.09% annualized return.

QCLN

• 1D: -0.26%
• 1M: -13.14%
• 6M: 0.01%
• YTD: 10.48%
• 1Y: 41.09%
• 3Y*: -2.29%
• 5Y*: -5.50%
• 10Y*: 13.08%
• ALL TIME*: 5.32%

PBW

• 1D: 0.16%
• 1M: -12.22%
• 6M: -4.18%
• YTD: 5.86%
• 1Y: 46.40%
• 3Y*: -7.64%
• 5Y*: -15.46%
• 10Y*: 7.09%
• ALL TIME*: -2.58%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
PBW Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF	$37.14M	$32.16M	$36.05M
QCLN First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund	$12.39M	$13.63M	$14.46M

QCLN vs. PBW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
QCLN First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund	10.48%	31.81%	-18.86%	-10.02%	-30.37%	-3.21%	184.00%	42.65%	-12.38%	32.34%
PBW Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF	5.86%	53.96%	-30.77%	-20.03%	-44.55%	-29.86%	204.82%	62.58%	-14.11%	39.92%

Correlation

The correlation between QCLN and PBW is 0.92, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.92
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.92
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.93
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.92
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 14, 2007	0.91

The correlation between QCLN and PBW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

QCLN vs. PBW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QCLN	PBW
Technology	43.0%	23.6%
Industrials	25.3%	25.7%
Consumer Cyclical	14.2%	15.3%
Basic Materials	8.0%	16.3%
Utilities	7.9%	9.1%
Financial Services	1.5%	1.4%
Energy	0.1%	3.9%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	2.1%
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

QCLN vs. PBW — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

QCLN

QCLN Risk / Return Rank: 39
QCLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 40
QCLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
QCLN Omega Ratio Rank: 38
QCLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
QCLN Martin Ratio Rank: 42

PBW

PBW Risk / Return Rank: 38
PBW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 40
PBW Sortino Ratio Rank: 40
PBW Omega Ratio Rank: 38
PBW Calmar Ratio Rank: 35
PBW Martin Ratio Rank: 36

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

QCLN vs. PBW - 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 WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW). 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	PBW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.99	0.98	+0.01
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.48	1.49	-0.01
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.18	1.18	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.25	1.20	+0.05
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.64	3.64	+1.00

QCLN vs. PBW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QCLN Sharpe Ratio is 0.99, which is comparable to the PBW Sharpe Ratio of 0.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QCLN and PBW, 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. PBW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QCLN drawdown since its inception was -76.18%, smaller than the maximum PBW drawdown of -89.02%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QCLN and PBW.

Drawdown Indicators

	QCLN	PBW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-76.18%	-89.02%	+12.84%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-32.12%	-36.09%	+3.97%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-50.96%	-65.95%	+14.99%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-69.49%	-84.50%	+15.01%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-71.73%	-89.02%	+17.29%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-42.92%	-73.32%	+30.40%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-43.36%	-62.94%	+19.58%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.62%	11.82%	-3.20%

Volatility

QCLN vs. PBW - Volatility Comparison

First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN) and Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW) have volatilities of 15.14% and 14.90%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QCLN	PBW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	15.14%	14.90%	+0.24%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	33.63%	33.63%	0.00%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	40.58%	44.14%	-3.56%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	38.97%	43.61%	-4.64%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	35.54%	39.25%	-3.71%

QCLN vs. PBW - Expense Ratio Comparison

QCLN has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is lower than PBW's 0.61% expense ratio.

Dividends

QCLN vs. PBW - Dividend Comparison

QCLN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.17%, less than PBW's 1.47% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
PBW Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF	1.47%	0.79%	2.84%	3.68%	4.21%	1.71%	0.44%	1.45%	2.04%	1.28%	2.68%	1.53%
QCLN First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund	0.17%	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 PBW in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, QCLN and PBW move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, QCLN or PBW?

QCLN has higher volatility (15.14%) compared to PBW (14.90%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QCLN dropped -76.18% vs PBW's -89.02%.

Which ETF is better, QCLN or PBW?

On 10-year performance, QCLN leads with 13.08% vs 7.09% for PBW. On fees, QCLN is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, PBW has been the lower-risk option at 14.90%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QCLN or PBW?

Over the 10-year period, QCLN has performed better with a 13.08% return vs 7.09%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QCLN or PBW?

QCLN is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.61% for PBW.

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

PBW has the higher dividend yield at 1.47%, compared with 0.17% for QCLN.

What is the main difference between QCLN and PBW?

QCLN tracks Nasdaq Clean Edge Green Energy Index, while PBW tracks The WilderHill Clean Energy Index (AMEX). They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for QCLN and 0.61% for PBW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QCLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.99 vs 0.98), 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.