QCLN vs. TAN

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

QCLN (First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund) and TAN (Invesco Solar ETF) are both Alternative Energy Equities funds - QCLN tracks the Nasdaq Clean Edge Green Energy Index while TAN tracks the MAC Global Solar Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, QCLN returned 17.54%/yr vs 12.83%/yr for TAN. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. QCLN charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for TAN.

Performance

QCLN vs. TAN - 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 Solar ETF (TAN). 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 TAN's 24.41% return. Over the past 10 years, QCLN has outperformed TAN with an annualized return of 17.54%, while TAN has yielded a comparatively lower 12.83% 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%

TAN

• 1D: 0.87%
• 1M: -7.34%
• YTD: 24.41%
• 6M: 18.89%
• 1Y: 90.67%
• 3Y*: -3.33%
• 5Y*: -6.08%
• 10Y*: 12.83%

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

QCLN vs. TAN - 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%
TAN Invesco Solar ETF	24.41%	48.31%	-37.61%	-26.79%	-5.24%	-25.10%	233.96%	66.53%	-25.67%	54.38%

Correlation

The correlation between QCLN and TAN is 0.78, 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	0.78
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.81
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.84
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.82
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 15, 2008	0.83

The correlation between QCLN and TAN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

QCLN vs. TAN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QCLN	TAN
Technology	47.6%	65.1%
Industrials	24.8%	2.3%
Consumer Cyclical	10.2%	-
Utilities	8.1%	29.2%
Basic Materials	7.8%	-
Financial Services	1.4%	3.5%
Energy	0.1%	57.3%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

QCLN vs. TAN — 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

TAN

TAN Risk / Return Rank: 74
TAN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
TAN Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
TAN Omega Ratio Rank: 61
TAN Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
TAN Martin Ratio Rank: 76

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. TAN - 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 Solar ETF (TAN). 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	TAN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.91	2.38	+0.53
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.29	3.03	+0.26
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	1.36	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.54	4.35	+2.19
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	21.21	13.98	+7.24

QCLN vs. TAN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QCLN Sharpe Ratio is 2.91, which is comparable to the TAN Sharpe Ratio of 2.38. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QCLN and TAN, 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. TAN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QCLN drawdown since its inception was -76.18%, smaller than the maximum TAN drawdown of -95.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QCLN and TAN.

Drawdown Indicators

	QCLN	TAN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-76.18%	-95.29%	+19.11%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.40%	-20.94%	+4.54%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-56.08%	-64.40%	+8.32%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-69.49%	-73.95%	+4.46%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-71.73%	-78.53%	+6.80%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-24.38%	-71.94%	+47.56%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-43.40%	-78.47%	+35.07%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.05%	6.51%	-1.46%

Volatility

QCLN vs. TAN - Volatility Comparison

First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN) and Invesco Solar ETF (TAN) have volatilities of 16.78% and 16.46%, 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	TAN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	16.78%	16.46%	+0.32%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	29.37%	28.51%	+0.86%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	36.95%	38.32%	-1.37%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	38.45%	40.11%	-1.66%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	35.18%	38.17%	-2.99%

QCLN vs. TAN - Expense Ratio Comparison

QCLN has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is lower than TAN's 0.69% expense ratio.

Dividends

QCLN vs. TAN - Dividend Comparison

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

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
TAN Invesco Solar ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.50%	0.09%	0.00%	0.00%	0.09%	0.30%	0.69%	1.77%	5.04%	1.60%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QCLN and TAN in my portfolio?

QCLN and TAN have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QCLN or TAN?

QCLN has higher volatility (16.78%) compared to TAN (16.46%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QCLN dropped -76.18% vs TAN's -95.29%.

Which ETF is better, QCLN or TAN?

On 10-year performance, QCLN leads with 17.54% vs 12.83% for TAN. On fees, QCLN is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, TAN has been the lower-risk option at 16.46%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QCLN or TAN?

Over the 10-year period, QCLN has performed better with a 17.54% return vs 12.83%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QCLN or TAN?

QCLN is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for TAN.

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

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

What is the main difference between QCLN and TAN?

QCLN tracks Nasdaq Clean Edge Green Energy Index, while TAN tracks MAC Global Solar Energy Index. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for QCLN and 0.69% for TAN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QCLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.91 vs 2.38), 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.