ECHMX vs. MUC

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ECHMX (Eaton Vance National Municipal Income Fund) and MUC (BlackRock MuniHoldings California Quality Fund) are both Municipal Bonds funds. Over the past 10 years, ECHMX returned 1.67%/yr vs 0.78%/yr for MUC. At a 0.26 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ECHMX charges 1.39%/yr vs 2.14%/yr for MUC.

Performance

ECHMX vs. MUC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Eaton Vance National Municipal Income Fund (ECHMX) and BlackRock MuniHoldings California Quality Fund (MUC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ECHMX achieves a 1.80% return, which is significantly lower than MUC's 4.06% return. Over the past 10 years, ECHMX has outperformed MUC with an annualized return of 1.67%, while MUC has yielded a comparatively lower 0.78% annualized return.

ECHMX

• 1D: 0.22%
• 1M: 0.79%
• YTD: 1.80%
• 6M: 2.07%
• 1Y: 7.30%
• 3Y*: 3.13%
• 5Y*: 0.12%
• 10Y*: 1.67%

MUC

• 1D: -0.19%
• 1M: 0.68%
• YTD: 4.06%
• 6M: 3.70%
• 1Y: 10.52%
• 3Y*: 6.28%
• 5Y*: -2.69%
• 10Y*: 0.78%

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

ECHMX vs. MUC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ECHMX Eaton Vance National Municipal Income Fund	1.80%	2.64%	1.45%	6.36%	-10.60%	0.70%	5.01%	7.51%	1.02%	3.90%
MUC BlackRock MuniHoldings California Quality Fund	4.06%	5.96%	0.76%	7.86%	-26.81%	7.38%	11.85%	18.12%	-9.00%	6.07%

Correlation

The correlation between ECHMX and MUC is 0.41, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.41
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.48
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.46
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.39
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 3, 1998	0.26

The correlation between ECHMX and MUC shifts across timeframes, from 0.26 (all time) to 0.48 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

ECHMX vs. MUC — Risk / Return Rank

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

ECHMX

ECHMX Risk / Return Rank: 59
ECHMX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
ECHMX Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
ECHMX Omega Ratio Rank: 84
ECHMX Calmar Ratio Rank: 42
ECHMX Martin Ratio Rank: 37

MUC

MUC Risk / Return Rank: 23
MUC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 21
MUC Sortino Ratio Rank: 25
MUC Omega Ratio Rank: 24
MUC Calmar Ratio Rank: 20
MUC Martin Ratio Rank: 27

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.

ECHMX vs. MUC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Eaton Vance National Municipal Income Fund (ECHMX) and BlackRock MuniHoldings California Quality Fund (MUC). 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.

	ECHMX	MUC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.31	1.31	+1.00
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.54	2.08	+1.46
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.56	1.25	+0.31
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.47	1.62	+0.85
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.05	6.57	+1.48
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ECHMX vs. MUC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ECHMX Sharpe Ratio is 2.31, which is higher than the MUC Sharpe Ratio of 1.31. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ECHMX and MUC, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ECHMX	MUC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.31	1.31	+1.00
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.03	-0.24	+0.26
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.38	0.07	+0.32
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.63	0.29	+0.34

Drawdowns

ECHMX vs. MUC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ECHMX drawdown since its inception was -40.96%, smaller than the maximum MUC drawdown of -48.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ECHMX and MUC.

Drawdown Indicators

	ECHMX	MUC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-40.96%	-48.97%	+8.01%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.92%	-6.53%	+3.61%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-7.41%	-14.51%	+7.10%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-16.32%	-38.29%	+21.97%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-16.32%	-38.29%	+21.97%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.34%	-16.50%	+16.16%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.94%	-9.90%	+5.96%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.89%	1.60%	-0.71%

Volatility

ECHMX vs. MUC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Eaton Vance National Municipal Income Fund (ECHMX) is 1.18%, while BlackRock MuniHoldings California Quality Fund (MUC) has a volatility of 2.37%. This indicates that ECHMX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MUC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ECHMX	MUC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.18%	2.37%	-1.19%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.31%	6.24%	-3.93%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.14%	8.05%	-4.91%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.60%	11.50%	-6.90%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.35%	11.89%	-7.54%

ECHMX vs. MUC - Expense Ratio Comparison

ECHMX has a 1.39% expense ratio, which is lower than MUC's 2.14% expense ratio.

Dividends

ECHMX vs. MUC - Dividend Comparison

ECHMX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.99%, less than MUC's 5.97% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ECHMX Eaton Vance National Municipal Income Fund	2.99%	3.76%	3.29%	2.41%	2.27%	1.38%	1.92%	2.76%	2.86%	2.90%	3.07%	3.14%
MUC BlackRock MuniHoldings California Quality Fund	5.97%	6.06%	5.62%	3.84%	5.79%	4.27%	3.96%	3.90%	4.99%	5.14%	5.45%	5.46%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ECHMX and MUC in my portfolio?

ECHMX and MUC have a correlation of 0.41, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ECHMX or MUC?

MUC has higher volatility (2.37%) compared to ECHMX (1.18%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ECHMX dropped -40.96% vs MUC's -48.97%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ECHMX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.31 vs 1.31), 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.