CLOZ vs. NEA

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

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 9.93%/yr vs 9.08%/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

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.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CLOZ achieves a 2.09% return, which is significantly lower than NEA's 2.78% return.

CLOZ

• 1D: -0.17%
• 1M: -0.35%
• YTD: 2.09%
• 6M: 2.33%
• 1Y: 5.19%
• 3Y*: 9.93%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

NEA

• 1D: 0.09%
• 1M: 2.64%
• YTD: 2.78%
• 6M: 3.40%
• 1Y: 14.64%
• 3Y*: 9.08%
• 5Y*: -0.13%
• 10Y*: 2.97%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CLOZ vs. NEA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
CLOZ Panagram BBB-B CLO ETF	2.09%	5.99%	11.85%	14.99%
NEA Nuveen AMT-Free Quality Municipal Income Fund	2.78%	11.31%	9.50%	-1.21%

Correlation

The correlation between CLOZ and NEA is 0.03, 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	0.03
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.02
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 24, 2023	0.01

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: 41
CLOZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
CLOZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
CLOZ Omega Ratio Rank: 64
CLOZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 28
CLOZ Martin Ratio Rank: 32

NEA

NEA Risk / Return Rank: 79
NEA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
NEA Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
NEA Omega Ratio Rank: 77
NEA Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
NEA Martin Ratio Rank: 84

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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	CLOZ	NEA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.50	1.37	+0.13
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.92	2.06	-0.14
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.27	+0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.34	2.02	-0.69
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.43	8.06	-3.63

CLOZ vs. NEA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CLOZ Sharpe Ratio is 1.50, which is comparable to the NEA Sharpe Ratio of 1.37. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CLOZ and NEA, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

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.

Drawdown Indicators

	CLOZ	NEA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest 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 Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.55%	-4.44%	+3.89%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.38%	-8.00%	+7.62%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.17%	1.82%	-0.65%

Volatility

CLOZ vs. NEA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Panagram BBB-B CLO ETF (CLOZ) is 0.67%, while Nuveen AMT-Free Quality Municipal Income Fund (NEA) has a volatility of 2.53%. 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.

Volatility by Period

	CLOZ	NEA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.67%	2.53%	-1.86%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.18%	8.68%	-5.50%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.47%	10.73%	-7.26%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	3.79%	11.52%	-7.73%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3.79%	11.83%	-8.04%

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 7.42%, more than NEA's 7.16% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CLOZ Panagram BBB-B CLO ETF	7.42%	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	7.16%	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

Can I hold both CLOZ and NEA in my portfolio?

CLOZ and NEA have a correlation of 0.03, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CLOZ or NEA?

NEA has higher volatility (2.53%) compared to CLOZ (0.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CLOZ dropped -5.32% vs NEA's -43.83%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CLOZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.50 vs 1.37), 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.