QCLN vs. PBW

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

QCLN (First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund) and PBW (Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QCLN is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the Nasdaq Clean Edge Green Energy Index, while PBW is a Small Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the The WilderHill Clean Energy Index (AMEX). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, QCLN returned 17.54%/yr vs 10.55%/yr for PBW. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. 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 46.37% return, which is significantly higher than PBW's 35.89% return. Over the past 10 years, QCLN has outperformed PBW with an annualized return of 17.54%, while PBW has yielded a comparatively lower 10.55% annualized return.

QCLN

• 1D: 1.59%
• 1M: 2.93%
• YTD: 46.37%
• 6M: 38.49%
• 1Y: 106.69%
• 3Y*: 11.22%
• 5Y*: 0.23%
• 10Y*: 17.54%

PBW

• 1D: -0.19%
• 1M: -3.61%
• YTD: 35.89%
• 6M: 27.66%
• 1Y: 118.27%
• 3Y*: 5.84%
• 5Y*: -12.35%
• 10Y*: 10.55%

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

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	46.37%	31.81%	-18.86%	-10.02%	-30.37%	-3.21%	184.00%	42.65%	-12.38%	32.34%
PBW Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF	35.89%	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 0.91, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.91
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.92
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.93
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	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	47.6%	14.4%
Industrials	24.8%	34.2%
Consumer Cyclical	10.2%	14.9%
Utilities	8.1%	6.5%
Basic Materials	7.8%	16.2%
Financial Services	1.4%	1.5%
Energy	0.1%	11.2%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	1.1%
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

QCLN vs. PBW — Risk / Return Rank

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

QCLN

QCLN Risk / Return Rank: 85
QCLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
QCLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
QCLN Omega Ratio Rank: 74
QCLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
QCLN Martin Ratio Rank: 92

PBW

PBW Risk / Return Rank: 80
PBW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
PBW Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
PBW Omega Ratio Rank: 68
PBW Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
PBW Martin Ratio Rank: 78

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. 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	2.91	2.83	+0.08
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.29	3.12	+0.17
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	1.39	+0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.54	5.60	+0.94
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	21.21	14.48	+6.73

QCLN vs. PBW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QCLN Sharpe Ratio is 2.91, which is comparable to the PBW Sharpe Ratio of 2.83. 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	-16.40%	-21.24%	+4.84%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-56.08%	-68.04%	+11.96%
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	-24.38%	-65.75%	+41.37%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-43.40%	-62.90%	+19.50%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.05%	8.20%	-3.15%

Volatility

QCLN vs. PBW - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN) is 16.78%, while Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW) has a volatility of 17.70%. This indicates that QCLN experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PBW based on this measure. 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	16.78%	17.70%	-0.92%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	29.37%	30.93%	-1.56%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	36.95%	42.17%	-5.22%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	38.45%	43.34%	-4.89%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	35.18%	39.00%	-3.82%

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 0.15%, less than PBW's 1.24% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
PBW Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF	1.24%	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	0.15%	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 PBW in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, 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?

PBW has higher volatility (17.70%) compared to QCLN (16.78%). 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 17.54% vs 10.55% for PBW. On fees, QCLN is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, QCLN has been the lower-risk option at 16.78%. 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 17.54% return vs 10.55%. 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 1.24%, compared with 0.15% for QCLN.

What is the main difference between QCLN and PBW?

QCLN is categorized as Alternative Energy Equities, while PBW is Small Cap Growth Equities. 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 (2.91 vs 2.83), 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.