PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
LANSX vs. MUC
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

LANSX vs. MUC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Lord Abbett National Tax Free Fund (LANSX) and BlackRock MuniHoldings California Quality Fund (MUC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LANSX achieves a 3.20% return, which is significantly lower than MUC's 7.01% return. Over the past 10 years, LANSX has outperformed MUC with an annualized return of 2.01%, while MUC has yielded a comparatively lower 0.90% annualized return.


LANSX

1D
0.33%
1M
1.20%
6M
3.20%
YTD
3.20%
1Y
7.76%
3Y*
4.07%
5Y*
0.11%
10Y*
2.01%

MUC

1D
0.18%
1M
2.74%
6M
7.01%
YTD
7.01%
1Y
12.85%
3Y*
6.17%
5Y*
-2.38%
10Y*
0.90%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LANSX vs. MUC - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
LANSX
Lord Abbett National Tax Free Fund
3.20%3.14%2.67%7.16%-14.53%3.64%4.81%9.66%0.74%7.08%
MUC
BlackRock MuniHoldings California Quality Fund
7.01%5.96%0.76%7.86%-26.81%7.38%11.85%18.12%-9.00%6.07%

Correlation

The correlation between LANSX and MUC is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.47

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.50

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.48

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.41

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 2, 1998

0.27

Over the past year, LANSX and MUC have become more correlated (0.47) than their long-term average of 0.27, meaning their price movements have been converging.

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

LANSX vs. MUC — Risk / Return Rank

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

LANSX
LANSX Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
LANSX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LANSX Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
LANSX Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
LANSX Calmar Ratio Rank: 6767
Calmar Ratio Rank
LANSX Martin Ratio Rank: 5555
Martin Ratio Rank

MUC
MUC Risk / Return Rank: 4646
Overall Rank
MUC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4444
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MUC Sortino Ratio Rank: 5454
Sortino Ratio Rank
MUC Omega Ratio Rank: 4747
Omega Ratio Rank
MUC Calmar Ratio Rank: 3838
Calmar Ratio Rank
MUC Martin Ratio Rank: 4545
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.

LANSX vs. MUC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Lord Abbett National Tax Free Fund (LANSX) 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.

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.


LANSXMUCDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.83

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.35

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.60

1.30

+0.30

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.63

1.98

+0.65

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.31

8.02

+1.29

LANSX vs. MUC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LANSX Sharpe Ratio is 2.41, which is higher than the MUC Sharpe Ratio of 1.58. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LANSX 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.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

LANSX vs. MUC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LANSX drawdown since its inception was -21.25%, smaller than the maximum MUC drawdown of -48.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LANSX and MUC.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


LANSXMUCDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-21.25%

-48.97%

+27.72%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.96%

-6.53%

+3.57%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-7.15%

-14.51%

+7.36%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-20.34%

-38.29%

+17.95%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-20.34%

-38.29%

+17.95%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.45%

-14.13%

+13.68%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.16%

-9.92%

+6.76%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.84%

1.61%

-0.77%

Volatility

LANSX vs. MUC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Lord Abbett National Tax Free Fund (LANSX) is 0.57%, while BlackRock MuniHoldings California Quality Fund (MUC) has a volatility of 2.02%. This indicates that LANSX 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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


LANSXMUCDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.57%

2.02%

-1.45%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.50%

6.30%

-3.80%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.27%

8.19%

-4.92%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

4.76%

11.51%

-6.75%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

4.90%

11.90%

-7.00%

LANSX vs. MUC - Expense Ratio Comparison

LANSX has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is lower than MUC's 2.14% expense ratio.


Dividends

LANSX vs. MUC - Dividend Comparison

LANSX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.90%, less than MUC's 5.83% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
LANSX
Lord Abbett National Tax Free Fund
3.90%4.49%3.30%3.06%2.30%2.49%2.77%3.31%3.31%3.22%3.56%3.58%
MUC
BlackRock MuniHoldings California Quality Fund
5.83%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


LANSX and MUC have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MUC has higher volatility (2.02%) compared to LANSX (0.57%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LANSX dropped -21.25% vs MUC's -48.97%.

LANSX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.41 vs 1.58), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for LANSX and MUC

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