CLOZ vs. NEA
CLOZ (Panagram Bbb-B Clo ETF) is CLO fund actively managed by Panagram, while NEA (Nuveen AMT-Free Quality Municipal Income Fund) is a stock. Over the past 3 years, CLOZ returned 10.63%/yr vs 9.62%/yr for NEA. At a 0.01 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CLOZ charges 0.50%/yr vs 1.41%/yr for NEA.
Performance
CLOZ vs. NEA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CLOZ achieves a 2.55% return, which is significantly higher than NEA's 2.35% return.
CLOZ
- 1D
- -0.10%
- 1M
- 1.08%
- YTD
- 2.55%
- 6M
- 3.27%
- 1Y
- 6.17%
- 3Y*
- 10.63%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
NEA
- 1D
- 0.09%
- 1M
- 1.38%
- YTD
- 2.35%
- 6M
- 3.76%
- 1Y
- 15.04%
- 3Y*
- 9.62%
- 5Y*
- 0.08%
- 10Y*
- 3.04%
CLOZ vs. NEA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
CLOZ Panagram Bbb-B Clo ETF | 2.55% | 5.99% | 11.85% | 14.92% |
NEA Nuveen AMT-Free Quality Municipal Income Fund | 2.35% | 11.31% | 9.50% | -1.21% |
Correlation
The correlation between CLOZ and NEA is 0.02, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.02 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.02 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 25, 2023 | 0.01 |
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
CLOZ
NEA
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.
| CLOZ | NEA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.79 | 1.43 | +0.37 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.29 | 2.14 | +0.15 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.45 | 1.28 | +0.17 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.56 | 2.00 | -0.43 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.19 | 8.02 | -2.83 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CLOZ | NEA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.79 | 1.43 | +0.37 |
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 | 2.77 | 0.32 | +2.45 |
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 charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CLOZ | NEA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -5.32% | -43.83% | +38.51% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -3.90% | -7.27% | +3.37% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -5.32% | -15.16% | +9.84% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -36.57% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -36.57% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.10% | -4.84% | +4.74% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.38% | -8.01% | +7.63% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.17% | 1.81% | -0.64% |
Volatility
CLOZ vs. NEA - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Panagram Bbb-B Clo ETF (CLOZ) is 0.55%, while Nuveen AMT-Free Quality Municipal Income Fund (NEA) has a volatility of 4.63%. 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 charts...
Volatility by Period
| CLOZ | NEA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.55% | 4.63% | -4.08% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.13% | 8.51% | -5.38% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.45% | 10.58% | -7.13% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.81% | 11.48% | -7.67% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.81% | 11.81% | -8.00% |
CLOZ vs. NEA - Expense Ratio Comparison
CLOZ has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than NEA's 1.41% expense ratio.
Dividends
CLOZ vs. NEA - Dividend Comparison
CLOZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.01%, more than NEA's 7.19% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CLOZ Panagram Bbb-B Clo ETF | 8.01% | 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 | 7.19% | 7.36% | 6.63% | 3.95% | 5.49% | 4.50% | 4.45% | 4.46% | 5.40% | 5.33% | 5.70% | 5.71% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CLOZ and NEA have a correlation of 0.02, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
NEA has higher volatility (4.63%) compared to CLOZ (0.55%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CLOZ dropped -5.32% vs NEA's -43.83%.
CLOZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.79 vs 1.43), 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.
Find the right allocation for CLOZ and NEA
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer