NEA vs. CLOZ
NEA (Nuveen AMT-Free Quality Municipal Income Fund) is a stock, while CLOZ (Panagram Bbb-B Clo ETF) is CLO fund actively managed by Panagram. Over the past 3 years, NEA returned 9.40%/yr vs 10.62%/yr for CLOZ. At a 0.01 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. NEA charges 1.41%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for CLOZ.
Performance
NEA vs. CLOZ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, NEA achieves a 1.73% return, which is significantly lower than CLOZ's 2.53% return.
NEA
- 1D
- -0.61%
- 1M
- 3.38%
- YTD
- 1.73%
- 6M
- 2.95%
- 1Y
- 14.66%
- 3Y*
- 9.40%
- 5Y*
- -0.08%
- 10Y*
- 2.97%
CLOZ
- 1D
- -0.02%
- 1M
- 0.66%
- YTD
- 2.53%
- 6M
- 3.13%
- 1Y
- 6.21%
- 3Y*
- 10.62%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
NEA vs. CLOZ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
NEA Nuveen AMT-Free Quality Municipal Income Fund | 1.73% | 11.31% | 9.50% | -1.21% |
CLOZ Panagram Bbb-B Clo ETF | 2.53% | 5.99% | 11.85% | 14.92% |
Correlation
The correlation between NEA and CLOZ 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
NEA vs. CLOZ — Risk / Return Rank
NEA
CLOZ
NEA vs. CLOZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Nuveen AMT-Free Quality Municipal Income Fund (NEA) and Panagram Bbb-B Clo ETF (CLOZ). 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.
| NEA | CLOZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.42 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.22 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.28 | 1.46 | -0.18 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.02 | 1.60 | +0.43 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.11 | 5.31 | +2.80 |
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
| NEA | CLOZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.39 | 1.81 | -0.42 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.01 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.25 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.32 | 2.77 | -2.45 |
Drawdowns
NEA vs. CLOZ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum NEA drawdown since its inception was -43.83%, which is greater than CLOZ's maximum drawdown of -5.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NEA and CLOZ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| NEA | CLOZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -43.83% | -5.32% | -38.51% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.27% | -3.90% | -3.37% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -15.16% | -5.32% | -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 | -5.41% | -0.12% | -5.29% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.01% | -0.38% | -7.63% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.81% | 1.17% | +0.64% |
Volatility
NEA vs. CLOZ - Volatility Comparison
Nuveen AMT-Free Quality Municipal Income Fund (NEA) has a higher volatility of 3.80% compared to Panagram Bbb-B Clo ETF (CLOZ) at 0.42%. This indicates that NEA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CLOZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| NEA | CLOZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.80% | 0.42% | +3.38% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.50% | 3.13% | +5.37% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.59% | 3.45% | +7.14% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 11.49% | 3.80% | +7.69% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 11.81% | 3.80% | +8.01% |
NEA vs. CLOZ - Expense Ratio Comparison
NEA has a 1.41% expense ratio, which is higher than CLOZ's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
NEA vs. CLOZ - Dividend Comparison
NEA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.23%, less than CLOZ's 7.39% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CLOZ Panagram Bbb-B Clo ETF | 7.39% | 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 | 7.23% | 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
NEA and CLOZ 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 (3.80%) compared to CLOZ (0.42%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NEA dropped -43.83% vs CLOZ's -5.32%.
CLOZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.81 vs 1.39), 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 NEA and CLOZ
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