PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
NEA vs. MUB
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

NEA vs. MUB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Nuveen AMT-Free Quality Municipal Income Fund (NEA) and iShares National AMT-Free Muni Bond ETF (MUB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NEA achieves a 1.73% return, which is significantly higher than MUB's 1.24% return. Over the past 10 years, NEA has outperformed MUB with an annualized return of 2.97%, while MUB has yielded a comparatively lower 2.00% annualized 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%

MUB

1D
-0.08%
1M
0.56%
YTD
1.24%
6M
1.74%
1Y
6.95%
3Y*
3.43%
5Y*
0.86%
10Y*
2.00%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

NEA vs. MUB - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
NEA
Nuveen AMT-Free Quality Municipal Income Fund
1.73%11.31%9.50%0.75%-23.32%8.16%10.07%22.42%-5.72%8.77%
MUB
iShares National AMT-Free Muni Bond ETF
1.24%3.78%1.26%5.56%-7.34%1.02%5.12%7.06%0.93%4.72%

Correlation

The correlation between NEA and MUB is 0.52, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


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

0.52

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

0.60

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

0.58

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

0.52

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 11, 2007

0.36

The correlation between NEA and MUB shifts across timeframes, from 0.36 (all time) to 0.60 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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. MUB — Risk / Return Rank

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

NEA
NEA Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
NEA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7979
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NEA Sortino Ratio Rank: 7676
Sortino Ratio Rank
NEA Omega Ratio Rank: 7676
Omega Ratio Rank
NEA Calmar Ratio Rank: 7474
Calmar Ratio Rank
NEA Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank

MUB
MUB Risk / Return Rank: 6666
Overall Rank
MUB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7272
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MUB Sortino Ratio Rank: 7676
Sortino Ratio Rank
MUB Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
MUB Calmar Ratio Rank: 5050
Calmar Ratio Rank
MUB Martin Ratio Rank: 5151
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.

NEA vs. MUB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Nuveen AMT-Free Quality Municipal Income Fund (NEA) and iShares National AMT-Free Muni Bond ETF (MUB). 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.


NEAMUBDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.39

2.39

-1.00

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.08

3.49

-1.41

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.28

1.50

-0.22

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.02

2.50

-0.48

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

8.11

8.85

-0.73

NEA vs. MUB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NEA Sharpe Ratio is 1.39, which is lower than the MUB Sharpe Ratio of 2.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NEA and MUB, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


NEAMUBDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.39

2.39

-1.00

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.01

0.21

-0.22

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.25

0.41

-0.15

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.32

0.58

-0.27

Drawdowns

NEA vs. MUB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NEA drawdown since its inception was -43.83%, which is greater than MUB's maximum drawdown of -13.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NEA and MUB.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


NEAMUBDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-43.83%

-13.68%

-30.15%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.27%

-2.79%

-4.48%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.16%

-5.34%

-9.82%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-36.57%

-11.88%

-24.69%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-36.57%

-13.68%

-22.89%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.41%

-0.70%

-4.71%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.01%

-2.23%

-5.78%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.81%

0.79%

+1.02%

Volatility

NEA vs. MUB - Volatility Comparison

Nuveen AMT-Free Quality Municipal Income Fund (NEA) has a higher volatility of 3.80% compared to iShares National AMT-Free Muni Bond ETF (MUB) at 0.97%. This indicates that NEA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MUB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


NEAMUBDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.80%

0.97%

+2.83%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.50%

2.22%

+6.28%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.59%

2.92%

+7.67%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

11.49%

4.06%

+7.43%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

11.81%

4.92%

+6.89%

NEA vs. MUB - Expense Ratio Comparison

NEA has a 1.41% expense ratio, which is higher than MUB's 0.07% expense ratio.


Dividends

NEA vs. MUB - Dividend Comparison

NEA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.23%, more than MUB's 3.17% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
MUB
iShares National AMT-Free Muni Bond ETF
3.17%3.14%3.01%2.65%2.11%1.81%2.11%2.42%2.46%2.26%2.21%2.51%
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 MUB have a correlation of 0.52, 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 MUB (0.97%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NEA dropped -43.83% vs MUB's -13.68%.

MUB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.39 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for NEA and MUB

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