Do PBD and QCLN hold the same stocks?

By their latest filings, 14% of their books are the same securities at the same weight. Overlap is the sum of the smaller weight of every security they share.

Which is more different from the S&P 500, PBD or QCLN?

PBD has 2% of its weight in S&P 500 names and QCLN has 34%, so PBD differs more from the index.

Which is cheaper, PBD or QCLN?

PBD charges 0.75% a year and QCLN charges 0.59%, so QCLN is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

Data as of Nov 4, 2026.

Thematic ETFs

PBD vs QCLN: Holdings Overlap & Returns

Share on X Download as PDF

Over the year to Nov 4, 2026, PBD returned −2.1% to QCLN's +1.6%; 14% of their weight is in the same names.

askIQ about this page

askIQ about PBD and QCLN

Net assets on Nov 3, 2026: $99m for Invesco Global Clean Energy ETF and $489m for First Trust Nasdaq Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund.

PBD on its own →QCLN on its own →

At a glance

1.9%

PBD in the S&P 500

33.5%

QCLN in the S&P 500

−2.1%

PBD total return, 1 year

+1.6%

QCLN total return, 1 year

PBD · 1 year to Nov 4, 2026 98% of its weight is outside the S&P 500

2% of PBD's weight is in S&P 500 companies and 98% is outside the index. Holdings as of Nov 3, 2026.

QCLN · 1 year to Nov 4, 2026 67% of its weight is outside the S&P 500

34% of QCLN's weight is in S&P 500 companies and 67% is outside the index. Holdings as of Nov 3, 2026.

Pair scorecard

QCLN costs 0.16 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 3.7 points; QCLN is 4.9 times larger.

Points (pts) are percentage points.

PBD vs QCLN: Holdings Overlap & Returns
Measure	PBD	QCLN
Return
Measure	PBD	QCLN
Total return, 1 year	−2.1%	+1.6%
Drawdown
Measure	PBD	QCLN
Below its all-time high	56.6%, high on Jan 22, 2021	47.7%, high on Feb 9, 2021
Against its benchmark
Measure	PBD	QCLN
What it tracks	Clean energy	Clean energy
Its benchmark, total return, 1 year	+16.9%	+14.8%
Against its benchmark, 1 year	behind by 19.0 pts	behind by 13.2 pts
Cost and size
Measure	PBD	QCLN
Expense ratio	0.75%	0.59%
Net assets, as of Nov 3, 2026	$99m	$489m
Holdings
Measure	PBD	QCLN
Holdings in common	14%

Method

Risk and return

Jun 22, 2007 to Oct 30, 2026 · 1,010 weekly returns

PBD QCLN

Return

Total return edge QCLN −23.5% +108.7%

Annualized edge QCLN −1.4% +3.9%

Price return edge QCLN −42.0% +89.5%

Risk

Volatility edge PBD 29.7% 34.7%

Max drawdown edge QCLN (slight) −77.8% −73.4%

Downside capture 114.0% 127.5%

Beta 1.23 1.50

Risk-adjusted

Sharpe edge QCLN 0.05 0.24

Sortino edge QCLN 0.07 0.34

Treynor 0.013 0.057

Calmar edge QCLN −0.02 0.05

Against the benchmark

Alpha −4.2% a year −6.4% a year

Alpha t-stat −1.07 −1.36

Information ratio −0.17 −0.06

Tracking error 18.0% 22.8%

Each against its own benchmark: PBD against EFA, Jun 22, 2007 to Oct 30, 2026; QCLN against IWV, Feb 23, 2007 to Oct 30, 2026.

Reading

From Jun 2007 to Oct 2026, QCLN returned more: +108.7% to −23.5%. PBD swung less: 29.7% to 34.7%. QCLN fell slightly less at its worst: −73.4% to −77.8%.

Full scorecard

19 measures, with how each is measured Open ↓

Risk and return: PBD vs QCLN: Holdings Overlap & Returns
Measure	PBD	QCLN	Edge	How it is measured
Return
Total return	−23.5%	+108.7%	QCLN	Price change plus distributions, reinvested.
Annualized	−1.4%	+3.9%	QCLN	Total return as a yearly rate.
Price return	−42.0%	+89.5%	QCLN	Price change alone, distributions left out.
Risk
Volatility	29.7%	34.7%	PBD	Spread of weekly returns, annualized. Lower is steadier.
Downside deviation	21.8%	24.4%	PBD	Like volatility, counting only weeks below the Treasury bill rate.
Max drawdown	−77.8%	−73.4%	QCLN (slight)	Deepest fall from a high to the low after it.
Upside capture	126.1%	173.8%		Share of its benchmark's rise caught in the weeks it rose.
Downside capture	114.0%	127.5%		Share of its benchmark's fall taken in the weeks it fell. Lower is better.
Beta	1.23	1.50	Not an edge	How far it moves for each 1% its benchmark moves.
R squared	0.66	0.63	Not an edge	Share of its weekly moves its benchmark explains.
Risk-adjusted
Sharpe	0.05	0.24	QCLN	Return above Treasury bills per unit of volatility.
Sortino	0.07	0.34	QCLN	Return above Treasury bills per unit of downside deviation.
Treynor	0.013	0.057		Return above Treasury bills per unit of beta.
Calmar	−0.02	0.05	QCLN	Annualized return divided by the max drawdown.
Against the benchmark
Benchmark	EFA	IWV		The ETF each fund is measured against.
Alpha	−4.2% a year	−6.4% a year	Not significant	Yearly return beyond what its beta to the benchmark predicts.
Alpha t-stat	−1.07	−1.36	Not an edge	How sure the alpha is. Below 2, it could be chance.
Alpha range	−12.0% to +3.5%	−15.7% to +2.9%	Includes zero	The 95% range for the yearly alpha.
Information ratio	−0.17	−0.06		Return against its benchmark per unit of tracking error.
Tracking error	18.0%	22.8%	Not an edge	How far weekly returns stray from the benchmark, annualized.

Computed by ETFIQ from Tiingo daily prices and ETFIQ's distribution records, 1,010 weekly returns. Cash rate: the 13-week Treasury bill.

What they share

14%

By the books each fund has filed, PBD and QCLN hold 14% of their money in the same securities at the same weight. Holdings dated Nov 3, 2026.

50%

0 half 100%

half

14% in common

Positions both hold · largest shared weight first PBD QCLN

Universal Display Corp 1.09% 1.49%

Itron Inc 1.05% 1.55%

Bloom Energy Corp 1.01% 8.90%

HA Sustainable Infrastructure Capital Inc 0.99% 1.78%

Rivian Automotive Inc 0.94% 6.42%

First Solar Inc 0.90% 3.95%

Ormat Technologies Inc 0.89% 2.09%

Enlight Renewable Energy Ltd 0.83% 3.27%

Enphase Energy Inc 0.82% 1.45%

Sociedad Quimica y Minera de Chile SA 0.79% 0.92%

Sunrun Inc 0.93% 0.76%

SolarEdge Technologies Inc 1.10% 0.73%

Only in one fund ↓

Only in PBD

SES AI Corp 1.38%

Verbund AG 1.30%

Lotte Energy Materials Corp 1.29%

Landis+Gyr Group AG 1.27%

Nibe Industrier AB 1.26%

NFI Group Inc 1.15%

Samsung SDI Co Ltd 1.10%

Tamura Corp 1.09%

Only in QCLN

Tesla, Inc. 9.29%

Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. 8.99%

ON Semiconductor Corporation 8.41%

Nextpower Inc. (Class A) 5.02%

Acuity Inc. 3.58%

Advanced Energy Industries, Inc. 3.45%

Brookfield Renewable Partners LP 3.29%

Albemarle Corporation 2.87%

Check overlap with more funds →

Window by window

Window by window: PBD vs QCLN: Holdings Overlap & Returns
	Total return		vs its benchmark
Window	PBD	QCLN	PBD	QCLN
3 months	−12.4%	−11.9%	−10.8 pts vs EFA	−11.6 pts vs IWV
6 months	−27.2%	−25.1%	−29.7 pts vs EFA	−30.0 pts vs IWV
1 year	−2.1%	+1.6%	−19.0 pts vs EFA	−13.2 pts vs IWV
3 years	+17.1%	+27.3%	−49.7 pts vs EFA	−53.7 pts vs IWV
Since launchNot the same days: PBD Jun 2007 · QCLN Feb 2007	−17.6%	+149.5%	not measured	not measured

Open this comparison in the app →

Side by side

PBD Invesco Global Clean Energy ETF · Holds 111 stocks in clean energy, 2% of its weight in S&P 500 companies QCLN First Trust Nasdaq Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund · Holds 57 stocks in clean energy, 34% of its weight in S&P 500 companies

Issuer Invesco First Trust

Theme Clean energy Clean energy

In the S&P 500 1.9% 33.5%

Active share vs the S&P 500 99.9% 97.9%

In the Nasdaq-100 0.0% 18.3%

Holdings 111 57

Top ten, share of the fund 12.2% 61.3%

Expense ratio 0.75% 0.59%

Fee for the differing part 0.75% 0.60%

Total return, 1 year −2.1% +1.6%

vs its benchmark −19.0 pts vs EFA −13.2 pts vs IWV

Below its high −56.6% −47.7%

Net assets, as of Nov 3, 2026 $99m $489m

As of Nov 4, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.

14% of the two portfolios are the same securities at the same weight.

Client brief:

The two-page PDF for this pair is coming. Save the comparison to follow its changes. Free. It needs an email sign-in, once.

Your saved page · Privacy.

Alert

About each fund

PBD

By weight, 2% of PBD's portfolio is stocks that are also in the S&P 500; its active share against the S&P 500 is 100%. The top ten holdings are 12% of the fund across 111 positions, as published by its issuer for Nov 3, 2026. Over the year to Nov 4, 2026 the fund returned −2.1% with distributions reinvested against +16.9% for its benchmark, the MSCI EAFE Index, so a holder was behind by 19.0 pts. It sits 56.6% below its all-time high of Jan 22, 2021.

QCLN

Over the year to Nov 4, 2026 the fund returned +1.6% with distributions reinvested against +14.8% for its benchmark, the Russell 3000 Index, so a holder was behind by 13.2 pts.

By weight, 34% of QCLN's portfolio is stocks that are also in the S&P 500; its active share against the S&P 500 is 98%. The top ten holdings are 61% of the fund across 57 positions, as published by its issuer for Nov 3, 2026. It sits 47.7% below its all-time high of Feb 9, 2021.

Questions people ask

Do PBD and QCLN hold the same stocks?: By their latest filings, 14% of their books are the same securities at the same weight. Overlap is the sum of the smaller weight of every security they share.
Which is more different from the S&P 500, PBD or QCLN?: PBD has 2% of its weight in S&P 500 names and QCLN has 34%, so PBD differs more from the index.
Which is cheaper, PBD or QCLN?: PBD charges 0.75% a year and QCLN charges 0.59%, so QCLN is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

Other comparisons

PBD vs PBW PBD vs TAN PBD vs FAN PBD vs CNRG QCLN vs ACES QCLN vs SMOG QCLN vs CNRG QCLN vs FAN

Where to next

All thematic ETFs ranked by the S&P 500 Difference Score →How the scores are computed →PBD on its own →QCLN on its own →PBD dividend history →PBD holdings →QCLN dividend history →QCLN holdings →Method →Standards and sources →

Sources and dates

PBD filings on SEC EDGAR ↗

PBD prospectus with the expense ratio (SEC) ↗

Invesco page for PBD ↗

QCLN filings on SEC EDGAR ↗

QCLN prospectus with the expense ratio (SEC) ↗

First Trust page for QCLN ↗

Links are sources, not endorsements. A comparison is not a recommendation.

How this is computed

Overlap adds up the smaller of the two weights for each security both funds hold.

Every number is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested.

Cite this pageCitation, APA and Markdown

ETFIQ, PBD against QCLN, data as of Nov 4, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/themes/pbd-vs-qcln

Open data →

Free to use with attribution for data ETFIQ computes; issuer data stays under its owner's terms.