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

Performance

QCLN vs. QJUN - 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 FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - June (QJUN). 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 52.00% return, which is significantly higher than QJUN's 5.97% 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%

QJUN

1D
0.07%
1M
0.99%
YTD
5.97%
6M
6.64%
1Y
16.51%
3Y*
15.46%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QCLN vs. QJUN - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
QCLN
First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund
52.00%31.81%-18.86%-10.02%-30.37%6.11%
QJUN
FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - June
5.97%13.59%16.36%36.34%-17.34%7.08%

Correlation

The correlation between QCLN and QJUN is 0.57, 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

0.57

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

0.57

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 22, 2021

0.67

The correlation between QCLN and QJUN shifts across timeframes, from 0.57 (1 year) to 0.67 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

QCLN vs. QJUN - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
QCLN
QJUN

Industrials

30.2%
2.8%

Technology

20.8%
54.2%

Energy

13.2%
0.6%

Utilities

13.2%
1.4%

Basic Materials

9.4%
1.2%

Consumer Cyclical

9.4%
12.2%

Financial Services

1.9%
0.2%

Communication Services

-

15.5%

Consumer Defensive

-

7.6%

Healthcare

-

4.2%

Real Estate

-

0.1%

Industrials

QCLN
30.2%
QJUN
2.8%

Technology

QCLN
20.8%
QJUN
54.2%

Energy

QCLN
13.2%
QJUN
0.6%

Utilities

QCLN
13.2%
QJUN
1.4%

Basic Materials

QCLN
9.4%
QJUN
1.2%

Consumer Cyclical

QCLN
9.4%
QJUN
12.2%

Financial Services

QCLN
1.9%
QJUN
0.2%

Communication Services

QCLN

-

QJUN
15.5%

Consumer Defensive

QCLN

-

QJUN
7.6%

Healthcare

QCLN

-

QJUN
4.2%

Real Estate

QCLN

-

QJUN
0.1%

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. QJUN — Risk / Return Rank

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

QCLN
QCLN Risk / Return Rank: 8989
Overall Rank
QCLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9393
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QCLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 8686
Sortino Ratio Rank
QCLN Omega Ratio Rank: 8080
Omega Ratio Rank
QCLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
QCLN Martin Ratio Rank: 9393
Martin Ratio Rank

QJUN
QJUN Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
QJUN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6363
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QJUN Sortino Ratio Rank: 6666
Sortino Ratio Rank
QJUN Omega Ratio Rank: 7272
Omega Ratio Rank
QJUN Calmar Ratio Rank: 6565
Calmar Ratio Rank
QJUN Martin Ratio Rank: 8585
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. QJUN - 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 FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - June (QJUN). 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.


QCLNQJUNDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.34

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.81

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.47

1.42

+0.05

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

7.48

3.20

+4.28

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

25.77

17.42

+8.35

QCLN vs. QJUN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QCLN Sharpe Ratio is 3.42, which is higher than the QJUN Sharpe Ratio of 2.08. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QCLN and QJUN, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


QCLNQJUNDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.42

2.08

+1.34

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.05

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.49

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.20

0.79

-0.59

Drawdowns

QCLN vs. QJUN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QCLN drawdown since its inception was -76.18%, which is greater than QJUN's maximum drawdown of -19.92%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QCLN and QJUN.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QCLNQJUNDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-76.18%

-19.92%

-56.26%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-15.86%

-5.18%

-10.68%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-56.08%

-16.47%

-39.61%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-69.49%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-71.73%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-21.47%

0.00%

-21.47%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-43.44%

-3.88%

-39.56%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.59%

0.95%

+3.64%

Volatility

QCLN vs. QJUN - Volatility Comparison

First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN) has a higher volatility of 12.57% compared to FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - June (QJUN) at 0.31%. This indicates that QCLN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QJUN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QCLNQJUNDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

12.57%

0.31%

+12.26%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

26.03%

5.67%

+20.36%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

34.68%

7.99%

+26.69%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

37.96%

14.18%

+23.78%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

34.90%

14.18%

+20.72%

QCLN vs. QJUN - Expense Ratio Comparison

QCLN has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than QJUN's 0.90% expense ratio.


Dividends

QCLN vs. QJUN - Dividend Comparison

QCLN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.15%, while QJUN has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
QJUN
FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - June
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


QCLN and QJUN have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QCLN has higher volatility (12.57%) compared to QJUN (0.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QCLN dropped -76.18% vs QJUN's -19.92%.

On 3-year performance, QJUN leads with 15.46% vs 12.00% for QCLN. On fees, QCLN is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, QJUN has been the lower-risk option at 0.31%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, QJUN has performed better with a 15.46% return vs 12.00%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

QCLN is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QJUN.

QCLN has the higher dividend yield at 0.15%, compared with 0.00% for QJUN.

QCLN is categorized as Alternative Energy Equities, while QJUN is Nasdaq-100. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for QCLN and 0.90% for QJUN.

QCLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.42 vs 2.08), 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 QJUN

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