QCLU.L vs. BATG.L

Last updated Jul 18, 2026

QCLU.L (First Trust Nasdaq Clean Edge Green Energy UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) and BATG.L (L&G Battery Value-Chain UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QCLU.L is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the Nasdaq Clean Edge Green Energy Exclusions Index, while BATG.L is a Lithium & Battery Metals fund tracking the Solactive Battery Value-Chain Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, QCLU.L returned -3.82%/yr vs 11.24%/yr for BATG.L. A 0.70 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QCLU.L charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for BATG.L.

Performance

QCLU.L vs. BATG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Nasdaq Clean Edge Green Energy UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (QCLU.L) and L&G Battery Value-Chain UCITS ETF (BATG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

QCLU.L is traded in USD, while BATG.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the BATG.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QCLU.L achieves a 15.18% return, which is significantly higher than BATG.L's 5.18% return.

QCLU.L

• 1D: -2.60%
• 1M: -17.61%
• 6M: 4.25%
• YTD: 15.18%
• 1Y: 46.93%
• 3Y*: -3.01%
• 5Y*: -3.82%
• 10Y*: —

BATG.L

• 1D: -2.21%
• 1M: -18.06%
• 6M: -3.89%
• YTD: 5.18%
• 1Y: 58.06%
• 3Y*: 14.70%
• 5Y*: 11.24%
• 10Y*: —

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

QCLU.L vs. BATG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
QCLU.L First Trust Nasdaq Clean Edge Green Energy UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	15.18%	28.81%	-19.33%	-7.57%	-31.41%	-10.64%	19.19%	19.64%	-10.52%
BATG.L L&G Battery Value-Chain UCITS ETF	5.18%	72.52%	-1.20%	8.25%	-14.18%	15.94%	80.75%	17.48%	-45.00%

Correlation

The correlation between QCLU.L and BATG.L is 0.75, 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	0.75
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.75
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.74
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 18, 2018	0.70

The correlation between QCLU.L and BATG.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.70 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

QCLU.L vs. BATG.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

QCLU.L

QCLU.L Risk / Return Rank: 45
QCLU.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
QCLU.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 45
QCLU.L Omega Ratio Rank: 39
QCLU.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
QCLU.L Martin Ratio Rank: 51

BATG.L

BATG.L Risk / Return Rank: 68
BATG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
BATG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
BATG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 68
BATG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
BATG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 65

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.

QCLU.L vs. BATG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Nasdaq Clean Edge Green Energy UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (QCLU.L) and L&G Battery Value-Chain UCITS ETF (BATG.L). 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.

	QCLU.L	BATG.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.18	1.81	-0.64
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.75	2.33	-0.58
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.20	1.30	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.87	2.24	-0.37
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.48	7.83	-1.35

QCLU.L vs. BATG.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QCLU.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.18, which is lower than the BATG.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.81. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QCLU.L and BATG.L, 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

QCLU.L vs. BATG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QCLU.L drawdown since its inception was -71.99%, which is greater than BATG.L's maximum drawdown of -57.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QCLU.L and BATG.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	QCLU.L	BATG.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-71.99%	-57.13%	-14.86%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-24.92%	-25.76%	+0.84%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-56.88%	-33.86%	-23.02%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-70.15%	-34.08%	-36.07%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-41.20%	-25.76%	-15.44%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-29.29%	-19.82%	-9.47%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.23%	7.39%	-0.16%

Volatility

QCLU.L vs. BATG.L - Volatility Comparison

First Trust Nasdaq Clean Edge Green Energy UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (QCLU.L) has a higher volatility of 16.50% compared to L&G Battery Value-Chain UCITS ETF (BATG.L) at 10.35%. This indicates that QCLU.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BATG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QCLU.L	BATG.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	16.50%	10.35%	+6.15%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	31.62%	26.21%	+5.41%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	39.95%	31.97%	+7.98%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	38.97%	28.90%	+10.07%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	34.17%	28.85%	+5.32%

QCLU.L vs. BATG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

QCLU.L has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than BATG.L's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

QCLU.L vs. BATG.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither QCLU.L nor BATG.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QCLU.L and BATG.L in my portfolio?

QCLU.L and BATG.L have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, QCLU.L or BATG.L?

On fees, BATG.L is cheaper at 0.49% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, QCLU.L or BATG.L?

BATG.L is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for QCLU.L.

What is the main difference between QCLU.L and BATG.L?

QCLU.L is categorized as Alternative Energy Equities, while BATG.L is Lithium & Battery Metals. QCLU.L tracks Nasdaq Clean Edge Green Energy Exclusions Index, while BATG.L tracks Solactive Battery Value-Chain Index. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Legal & General Investment Management. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for QCLU.L and 0.49% for BATG.L.