Quantum Computing ETFs vs. Green/Clean Energy ETFs: A Late 2025 Comparison

As of mid-to-late November 2025, both thematic sectors have delivered strong gains amid broader market enthusiasm for transformative technologies. Quantum computing ETFs (primarily QTUM) have benefited from AI synergies, major breakthroughs (e.g., scalable qubits), and overlap with high-flying semiconductors.

Clean energy ETFs have rebounded sharply on renewed policy support, nuclear revival for AI data centers, and global decarbonization momentum.

Here's a head-to-head comparison using the leading ETFs in each category:
Quantum Computing Side

• QTUM – Defiance Quantum ETF
  Expense Ratio: 0.40%
  AUM: ~$3–3.5B
  YTD Return 2025: ~35–40%
  Notes: The main U.S.-listed quantum ETF. Blends pure quantum companies (IonQ, Rigetti, D-Wave) with big-tech enablers (Nvidia, IBM, Google, AMD). Strong AI overlap has driven performance.

Clean/Green Energy Side

1. ICLN – iShares Global Clean Energy ETF
   Expense Ratio: 0.39%
   AUM: ~$2–3B
   YTD Return 2025: ~45–50%
   Notes: Broadest and most popular clean-energy ETF (solar, wind, utilities, global exposure). Leading the pack in 2025.
2. TAN – Invesco Solar ETF
   Expense Ratio: 0.69%
   AUM: ~$1–1.5B
   YTD Return 2025: ~35–45%
   Notes: Pure-play solar. Benefiting from plunging panel prices and surging demand.
3. QCLN – First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund
   Expense Ratio: 0.59%
   AUM: ~$600–800M
   YTD Return 2025: ~30–40%
   Notes: U.S.-focused (EVs, batteries, renewables). Heavy exposure to Tesla, Enphase, First Solar, etc.
   

Head-to-Head Summary (Late 2025)

• 2025 Winner on Returns: Clean energy (especially ICLN) has slightly outperformed QTUM in recent months thanks to lower interest rates, AI-driven electricity demand, nuclear revival, and global policy tailwinds.
• Volatility: Both are high-beta and speculative, but clean energy has felt more cyclical historically, while quantum remains more “science project” risk.
• Stage of Development:
  – Green energy: Already scaling commercially (gigawatts deployed yearly).
  – Quantum: Still pre-commercial for most applications; true “quantum advantage” likely 5–15 years away.
• Correlation: Both move with the broader tech/growth trade (high correlation to Nasdaq), so they often rise and fall together.
• Long-Term Upside: Quantum has higher potential ceiling (if/when it matures), but green/clean energy is the more predictable multi-decade megatrend.
• Costs & Liquidity: Nearly identical — all have decent volume and expense ratios 0.39–0.69%.

Winner on pure 2025 returns: Clean energy ETFs (especially ICLN) have slightly edged out QTUM in recent months due to policy tailwinds and AI-driven electricity demand boosting nuclear/renewables.Deeper Comparison

1. 2025 Performance Drivers
   • Quantum (QTUM): Up 37% YTD on average. Gains tied to AI hype (quantum accelerates ML training) and milestones from Google, IBM, and startups. Heavy overlap with semiconductors (40–50% of holdings) means it moves like a "tech+next-gen" fund.
   • Green Energy: Broad funds like ICLN up ~45–50% YTD after a multi-year lull. Solar (TAN) and U.S. clean tech (QCLN) also strong. Key catalysts: Lower interest rates easing project financing, AI data center power needs reviving nuclear/renewables, and sustained global subsidies.
2. Volatility & Risk Profile
   • Both are high-beta (move more than the market).
   • Quantum: More speculative — pure-plays like IonQ can swing 20%+ on news. QTUM's big-tech ballast (Nvidia, AMD) reduces downside vs. a true pure-play.
   • Green Energy: Historically cyclical (hurt by high rates 2022–2024). 2025 rebound feels stronger but remains sensitive to policy changes and commodity prices.
3. Diversification & Holdings Overlap
   • Quantum ETFs: 70–80 holdings; ~50% "enablers" (Nvidia, Intel, Google) vs. ~20–30% pure quantum.
   • Green Energy: 80–100+ holdings; mix of utilities (stable) + equipment makers (growthy). Some indirect overlap — e.g., both benefit from AI power demand (quantum needs massive cooling/energy too).
4. Costs & Liquidity
   • Very similar: Expense ratios 0.39–0.69%, high daily volume, tight spreads.
   • QTUM wins slightly on fees/liquidity growth (AUM surged past $3B in 2025).
5. Long-Term Outlook (2030+)
   • Quantum: Higher upside potential (market could be $100B+ by 2035) but longer timeline to commercial "quantum advantage." More binary risk.
   • Green Energy: More predictable growth (net-zero mandates, electrification). Already scaling; lower "moonshot" reward but less chance of total flameout.
6. Correlation to Broader Tech
   • Both correlate highly with Nasdaq/tech (~0.8–0.9).
   • In a tech pullback, both get hit hard (as seen in late-October 2025 dips).

Which Should You Choose in Late 2025?

• If you want higher growth potential and AI adjacency: QTUM (quantum) — still the "next big thing" narrative.
• If you prefer a more established megatrend with recent momentum: ICLN or TAN (clean energy) — tangible deployment today + defensive utility exposure.
• Balanced approach: Small allocations to both (e.g., 5–10% each) as satellites in a tech-heavy portfolio. They complement rather than compete.

Both themes remain compelling long-term stories, but 2025 has been the year clean energy finally caught up (and briefly surpassed) quantum's hype-driven gains.

Disclaimer: Performance data is approximate and time-sensitive — always verify latest figures. This is general information, not personalized advice. Thematic ETFs are volatile; consider your risk tolerance and consult an advisor. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.