RFDI vs. QCLN

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

RFDI (First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Developed International ETF) and QCLN (First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - RFDI is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund actively managed by First Trust, while QCLN is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy. RFDI is actively managed, while QCLN is passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RFDI returned 8.56%/yr vs 17.39%/yr for QCLN. A 0.59 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RFDI charges 0.83%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for QCLN.

Performance

RFDI vs. QCLN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Developed International ETF (RFDI) and First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RFDI achieves a 7.65% return, which is significantly lower than QCLN's 52.94% return. Over the past 10 years, RFDI has underperformed QCLN with an annualized return of 8.56%, while QCLN has yielded a comparatively higher 17.39% annualized return.

RFDI

• 1D: -0.69%
• 1M: 1.91%
• YTD: 7.65%
• 6M: 10.55%
• 1Y: 23.94%
• 3Y*: 19.21%
• 5Y*: 8.07%
• 10Y*: 8.56%

QCLN

• 1D: -0.41%
• 1M: 16.40%
• YTD: 52.94%
• 6M: 50.79%
• 1Y: 120.21%
• 3Y*: 12.03%
• 5Y*: 2.16%
• 10Y*: 17.39%

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

RFDI vs. QCLN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
RFDI First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Developed International ETF	7.65%	35.95%	5.56%	18.14%	-23.57%	17.36%	9.16%	20.47%	-18.26%	24.08%
QCLN First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund	52.94%	31.81%	-18.86%	-10.02%	-30.37%	-3.21%	184.00%	42.65%	-12.38%	32.34%

Correlation

The correlation between RFDI and QCLN is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.49
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.56
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.59
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.59
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 15, 2016	0.59

The correlation between RFDI and QCLN shifts across timeframes, from 0.49 (1 year) to 0.59 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

RFDI vs. QCLN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RFDI	QCLN
Financial Services	27.2%	1.9%
Energy	11.5%	13.2%
Industrials	11.3%	30.2%
Consumer Cyclical	10.2%	9.4%
Healthcare	8.8%	-
Technology	7.9%	20.8%
Consumer Defensive	7.0%	-
Communication Services	4.8%	-
Utilities	4.7%	13.2%
Basic Materials	4.6%	9.4%
Real Estate	1.9%	-

Return for Risk

RFDI vs. QCLN — Risk / Return Rank

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

RFDI

RFDI Risk / Return Rank: 49
RFDI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
RFDI Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
RFDI Omega Ratio Rank: 48
RFDI Calmar Ratio Rank: 48
RFDI Martin Ratio Rank: 51

QCLN

QCLN Risk / Return Rank: 89
QCLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
QCLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
QCLN Omega Ratio Rank: 79
QCLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
QCLN Martin Ratio Rank: 94

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.

RFDI vs. QCLN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Developed International ETF (RFDI) 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.

	RFDI	QCLN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.67	3.49	-1.82
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.35	3.86	-1.51
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.48	-0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.36	7.62	-5.27
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.55	26.28	-17.73
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

RFDI vs. QCLN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RFDI Sharpe Ratio is 1.67, which is lower than the QCLN Sharpe Ratio of 3.49. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RFDI and QCLN, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	RFDI	QCLN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.67	3.49	-1.82
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.48	0.06	+0.43
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.49	0.50	-0.01
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.49	0.20	+0.29

Drawdowns

RFDI vs. QCLN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RFDI drawdown since its inception was -39.40%, smaller than the maximum QCLN drawdown of -76.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RFDI and QCLN.

Drawdown Indicators

	RFDI	QCLN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-39.40%	-76.18%	+36.78%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.20%	-15.86%	+5.66%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.44%	-56.08%	+42.64%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-35.87%	-69.49%	+33.62%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-39.40%	-71.73%	+32.33%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.51%	-20.99%	+18.48%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.24%	-43.45%	+34.21%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.81%	4.59%	-1.78%

Volatility

RFDI vs. QCLN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Developed International ETF (RFDI) is 4.65%, while First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN) has a volatility of 12.56%. This indicates that RFDI 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.

Volatility by Period

	RFDI	QCLN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.65%	12.56%	-7.91%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.90%	26.02%	-14.12%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.39%	34.88%	-20.49%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.76%	37.97%	-21.21%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.36%	34.91%	-17.55%

RFDI vs. QCLN - Expense Ratio Comparison

RFDI has a 0.83% expense ratio, which is higher than QCLN's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

RFDI vs. QCLN - Dividend Comparison

RFDI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.28%, more than QCLN's 0.15% yield.

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%
RFDI First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Developed International ETF	3.28%	3.45%	5.21%	2.43%	5.00%	3.22%	1.34%	2.72%	2.59%	1.63%	1.85%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RFDI and QCLN in my portfolio?

RFDI and QCLN have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RFDI or QCLN?

QCLN has higher volatility (12.56%) compared to RFDI (4.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RFDI dropped -39.40% vs QCLN's -76.18%.

Which ETF is better, RFDI or QCLN?

On 10-year performance, QCLN leads with 17.39% vs 8.56% for RFDI. On fees, QCLN is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, RFDI has been the lower-risk option at 4.65%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RFDI or QCLN?

Over the 10-year period, QCLN has performed better with a 17.39% return vs 8.56%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RFDI or QCLN?

QCLN is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.83% for RFDI.

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

RFDI has the higher dividend yield at 3.28%, compared with 0.15% for QCLN.

What is the main difference between RFDI and QCLN?

RFDI is categorized as Foreign Large Cap Equities, while QCLN is Alternative Energy Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.83% for RFDI and 0.60% for QCLN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QCLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.49 vs 1.67), 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.