PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CLOZ vs. NEA
Performance
Return for Risk
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility

Performance

CLOZ vs. NEA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Panagram Bbb-B Clo ETF (CLOZ) and Nuveen AMT-Free Quality Municipal Income Fund (NEA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

CLOZ vs. NEA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
CLOZ
Panagram Bbb-B Clo ETF
-1.92%5.99%11.85%14.92%
NEA
Nuveen AMT-Free Quality Municipal Income Fund
-1.74%11.31%9.50%-1.21%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CLOZ achieves a -1.92% return, which is significantly lower than NEA's -1.74% return.


CLOZ

1D
0.31%
1M
0.39%
YTD
-1.92%
6M
-0.71%
1Y
4.26%
3Y*
9.76%
5Y*
10Y*

NEA

1D
2.28%
1M
-4.67%
YTD
-1.74%
6M
2.13%
1Y
8.05%
3Y*
6.92%
5Y*
0.07%
10Y*
3.01%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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

CLOZ vs. NEA — Risk / Return Rank

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

CLOZ
CLOZ Risk / Return Rank: 4747
Overall Rank
CLOZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4545
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CLOZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 3939
Sortino Ratio Rank
CLOZ Omega Ratio Rank: 6464
Omega Ratio Rank
CLOZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 4747
Calmar Ratio Rank
CLOZ Martin Ratio Rank: 4141
Martin Ratio Rank

NEA
NEA Risk / Return Rank: 6565
Overall Rank
NEA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6767
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NEA Sortino Ratio Rank: 5858
Sortino Ratio Rank
NEA Omega Ratio Rank: 6060
Omega Ratio Rank
NEA Calmar Ratio Rank: 6565
Calmar Ratio Rank
NEA Martin Ratio Rank: 7474
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

CLOZ vs. NEA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Panagram Bbb-B Clo ETF (CLOZ) and Nuveen AMT-Free Quality Municipal Income Fund (NEA). 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.


CLOZNEADifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

0.78

0.72

+0.07

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.04

1.04

-0.01

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.22

1.15

+0.07

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

1.10

1.02

+0.08

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

3.53

4.27

-0.75

CLOZ vs. NEA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CLOZ Sharpe Ratio is 0.78, which is comparable to the NEA Sharpe Ratio of 0.72. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CLOZ and NEA, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.


Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CLOZNEADifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.78

0.72

+0.07

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.01

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.26

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

2.51

0.31

+2.20

Correlation

The correlation between CLOZ and NEA is 0.01, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.


Dividends

CLOZ vs. NEA - Dividend Comparison

CLOZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.97%, more than NEA's 7.49% yield.


TTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CLOZ
Panagram Bbb-B Clo ETF
7.97%7.63%9.09%8.81%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
NEA
Nuveen AMT-Free Quality Municipal Income Fund
7.49%7.36%6.63%3.95%5.49%4.50%4.45%4.46%5.40%5.33%5.70%5.71%

Drawdowns

CLOZ vs. NEA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CLOZ drawdown since its inception was -5.32%, smaller than the maximum NEA drawdown of -43.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CLOZ and NEA.


Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators


CLOZNEADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-5.32%

-43.83%

+38.51%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.90%

-8.45%

+4.55%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-36.57%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-36.57%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.15%

-8.64%

+5.49%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.36%

-8.03%

+7.67%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.22%

2.02%

-0.80%

Volatility

CLOZ vs. NEA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Panagram Bbb-B Clo ETF (CLOZ) is 1.35%, while Nuveen AMT-Free Quality Municipal Income Fund (NEA) has a volatility of 4.87%. This indicates that CLOZ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NEA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period


CLOZNEADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.35%

4.87%

-3.52%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.90%

7.04%

-4.14%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.48%

11.31%

-5.83%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

3.82%

11.17%

-7.35%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

3.82%

11.67%

-7.85%