QMAG vs. QCLN
QMAG (FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - August) and QCLN (First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - QMAG is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by First Trust, while QCLN is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy. QMAG is actively managed, while QCLN is passively managed. Over the past year, QMAG returned 15.85% vs 100.12% for QCLN. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QMAG charges 0.90%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for QCLN.
Performance
QMAG vs. QCLN - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QMAG achieves a 5.86% return, which is significantly lower than QCLN's 37.69% return.
QMAG
- 1D
- -0.81%
- 1M
- 0.50%
- YTD
- 5.86%
- 6M
- 5.92%
- 1Y
- 15.85%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
QCLN
- 1D
- -9.41%
- 1M
- 1.77%
- YTD
- 37.69%
- 6M
- 32.56%
- 1Y
- 100.12%
- 3Y*
- 7.73%
- 5Y*
- 0.04%
- 10Y*
- 15.88%
QMAG vs. QCLN - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
QMAG FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - August | 5.86% | 13.16% | 4.03% |
QCLN First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund | 37.69% | 31.81% | -2.09% |
Correlation
The correlation between QMAG and QCLN is 0.60, 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 | 0.60 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 20, 2024 | 0.61 |
The correlation between QMAG and QCLN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.60 to 0.61 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
QMAG vs. QCLN — Risk / Return Rank
QMAG
QCLN
QMAG vs. QCLN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - August (QMAG) and First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN). 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.
| QMAG | QCLN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.59 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.04 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.43 | 1.41 | +0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.04 | 6.35 | -3.30 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.35 | 21.67 | -7.32 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| QMAG | QCLN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.21 | 2.80 | -0.59 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.00 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.45 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.21 | 0.19 | +1.02 |
Drawdowns
QMAG vs. QCLN - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QMAG drawdown since its inception was -12.44%, smaller than the maximum QCLN drawdown of -76.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QMAG and QCLN.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QMAG | QCLN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -12.44% | -76.18% | +63.74% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.23% | -15.86% | +10.63% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -56.08% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -69.49% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -71.73% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.85% | -28.87% | +28.02% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.16% | -43.44% | +42.28% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.11% | 4.64% | -3.53% |
Volatility
QMAG vs. QCLN - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - August (QMAG) is 1.05%, while First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN) has a volatility of 16.35%. This indicates that QMAG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QCLN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QMAG | QCLN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.05% | 16.35% | -15.30% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.66% | 27.94% | -22.28% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 7.23% | 36.02% | -28.79% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 10.89% | 38.18% | -27.29% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 10.89% | 35.03% | -24.14% |
QMAG vs. QCLN - Expense Ratio Comparison
QMAG has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than QCLN's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
QMAG vs. QCLN - Dividend Comparison
QMAG has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QCLN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.16%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
QCLN First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund | 0.16% | 0.25% | 0.87% | 0.76% | 0.33% | 0.01% | 0.30% | 0.85% | 1.03% | 0.45% | 1.24% | 0.72% |
QMAG FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - August | 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
QMAG and QCLN have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
QCLN has higher volatility (16.35%) compared to QMAG (1.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QMAG dropped -12.44% vs QCLN's -76.18%.
On 1-year performance, QCLN leads with 100.12% vs 15.85% for QMAG. On fees, QCLN is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, QMAG has been the lower-risk option at 1.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, QCLN has performed better with a 100.12% return vs 15.85%. 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 QMAG.
QCLN has the higher dividend yield at 0.16%, compared with 0.00% for QMAG.
QMAG is categorized as Defined Outcome, while QCLN is Alternative Energy Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for QMAG and 0.60% for QCLN.
QCLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.80 vs 2.21), 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.
Find the right allocation for QMAG and QCLN
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