RFEM vs. QCLN

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

RFEM (First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF) and QCLN (First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - RFEM is a Emerging Markets Equities fund actively managed by First Trust, while QCLN is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy. RFEM is actively managed, while QCLN is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, RFEM returned 8.99%/yr vs 2.16%/yr for QCLN. A 0.59 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RFEM charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for QCLN.

Performance

RFEM vs. QCLN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF (RFEM) 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, RFEM achieves a 21.66% return, which is significantly lower than QCLN's 52.94% return.

RFEM

• 1D: -1.39%
• 1M: 4.27%
• YTD: 21.66%
• 6M: 23.54%
• 1Y: 45.49%
• 3Y*: 24.73%
• 5Y*: 8.99%
• 10Y*: —

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)

RFEM vs. QCLN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
RFEM First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF	21.66%	27.71%	10.85%	20.78%	-19.05%	0.97%	8.19%	20.33%	-18.80%	35.73%
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 RFEM and QCLN is 0.63, 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	0.63
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.63
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.62
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 16, 2016	0.59

The correlation between RFEM and QCLN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.59 to 0.63 - a consistent structural relationship.

RFEM vs. QCLN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RFEM	QCLN
Technology	35.8%	20.8%
Financial Services	20.4%	1.9%
Consumer Cyclical	11.4%	9.4%
Industrials	7.9%	30.2%
Energy	6.6%	13.2%
Communication Services	5.7%	-
Basic Materials	4.0%	9.4%
Consumer Defensive	3.4%	-
Healthcare	2.7%	-
Utilities	1.4%	13.2%
Real Estate	0.7%	-

Return for Risk

RFEM vs. QCLN — Risk / Return Rank

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

RFEM

RFEM Risk / Return Rank: 81
RFEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
RFEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
RFEM Omega Ratio Rank: 82
RFEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
RFEM Martin Ratio Rank: 81

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.

RFEM vs. QCLN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF (RFEM) 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.

	RFEM	QCLN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.71	3.49	-0.77
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.63	3.86	-0.23
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.49	1.48	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.92	7.62	-3.70
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.99	26.28	-10.29
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

RFEM vs. QCLN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RFEM Sharpe Ratio is 2.71, which is comparable to the QCLN Sharpe Ratio of 3.49. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RFEM 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

	RFEM	QCLN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.71	3.49	-0.77
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.51	0.06	+0.45
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.50	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.52	0.20	+0.32

Drawdowns

RFEM vs. QCLN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RFEM drawdown since its inception was -42.22%, smaller than the maximum QCLN drawdown of -76.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RFEM and QCLN.

Drawdown Indicators

	RFEM	QCLN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-42.22%	-76.18%	+33.96%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.65%	-15.86%	+4.21%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.81%	-56.08%	+40.27%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-34.73%	-69.49%	+34.76%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-71.73%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.39%	-20.99%	+19.60%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.98%	-43.45%	+31.47%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.85%	4.59%	-1.74%

Volatility

RFEM vs. QCLN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF (RFEM) is 6.86%, while First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN) has a volatility of 12.56%. This indicates that RFEM 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

	RFEM	QCLN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.86%	12.56%	-5.70%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.37%	26.02%	-11.65%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.85%	34.88%	-18.03%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.88%	37.97%	-20.09%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.81%	34.91%	-15.10%

RFEM vs. QCLN - Expense Ratio Comparison

RFEM has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than QCLN's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

RFEM vs. QCLN - Dividend Comparison

RFEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.68%, 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%
RFEM First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF	1.68%	1.98%	3.64%	3.28%	7.74%	3.21%	1.22%	3.75%	2.37%	1.62%	3.73%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RFEM and QCLN in my portfolio?

RFEM and QCLN have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RFEM or QCLN?

QCLN has higher volatility (12.56%) compared to RFEM (6.86%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RFEM dropped -42.22% vs QCLN's -76.18%.

Which ETF is better, RFEM or QCLN?

On 5-year performance, RFEM leads with 8.99% vs 2.16% for QCLN. On fees, QCLN is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, RFEM has been the lower-risk option at 6.86%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RFEM or QCLN?

Over the 5-year period, RFEM has performed better with a 8.99% return vs 2.16%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RFEM or QCLN?

QCLN is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for RFEM.

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

RFEM has the higher dividend yield at 1.68%, compared with 0.15% for QCLN.

What is the main difference between RFEM and QCLN?

RFEM is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while QCLN is Alternative Energy Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for RFEM and 0.60% for QCLN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QCLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.49 vs 2.71), 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.