NIM vs. NMS

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

NIM (Nuveen Select Maturities Municipal Fund) and NMS (Nuveen Minnesota Quality Municipal Income Fund) are both Municipal Bonds funds from Nuveen. Over the past 10 years, NIM returned 1.79%/yr vs 1.67%/yr for NMS. At a 0.17 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. NIM charges 0.03%/yr vs 0.03%/yr for NMS.

Performance

NIM vs. NMS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Nuveen Select Maturities Municipal Fund (NIM) and Nuveen Minnesota Quality Municipal Income Fund (NMS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NIM achieves a 1.41% return, which is significantly lower than NMS's 5.79% return. Over the past 10 years, NIM has outperformed NMS with an annualized return of 1.79%, while NMS has yielded a comparatively lower 1.67% annualized return.

NIM

• 1D: -0.11%
• 1M: 0.84%
• YTD: 1.41%
• 6M: 1.54%
• 1Y: 7.21%
• 3Y*: 5.04%
• 5Y*: 0.14%
• 10Y*: 1.79%

NMS

• 1D: -1.23%
• 1M: -0.73%
• YTD: 5.79%
• 6M: 4.72%
• 1Y: 13.07%
• 3Y*: 9.13%
• 5Y*: -0.86%
• 10Y*: 1.67%

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

NIM vs. NMS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
NIM Nuveen Select Maturities Municipal Fund	1.41%	10.88%	2.74%	0.75%	-12.95%	2.95%	5.44%	12.77%	-0.49%	5.40%
NMS Nuveen Minnesota Quality Municipal Income Fund	5.79%	2.10%	19.59%	1.57%	-21.89%	5.47%	5.80%	25.72%	-13.31%	-1.58%

Correlation

The correlation between NIM and NMS is 0.25, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.25
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.33
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.22
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.18
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 8, 2014	0.17

The correlation between NIM and NMS shifts across timeframes, from 0.17 (all time) to 0.33 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

NIM vs. NMS — Risk / Return Rank

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

NIM

NIM Risk / Return Rank: 11
NIM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 11
NIM Sortino Ratio Rank: 10
NIM Omega Ratio Rank: 11
NIM Calmar Ratio Rank: 12
NIM Martin Ratio Rank: 10

NMS

NMS Risk / Return Rank: 53
NMS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
NMS Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
NMS Omega Ratio Rank: 36
NMS Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
NMS Martin Ratio Rank: 71

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.

NIM vs. NMS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Nuveen Select Maturities Municipal Fund (NIM) and Nuveen Minnesota Quality Municipal Income Fund (NMS). 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.

	NIM	NMS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.81	1.55	-0.75
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.15	2.26	-1.11
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.16	1.29	-0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.09	4.62	-3.53
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.66	12.67	-10.01

NIM vs. NMS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NIM Sharpe Ratio is 0.81, which is lower than the NMS Sharpe Ratio of 1.55. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NIM and NMS, 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

NIM vs. NMS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NIM drawdown since its inception was -23.09%, smaller than the maximum NMS drawdown of -38.76%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NIM and NMS.

Drawdown Indicators

	NIM	NMS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.09%	-38.76%	+15.67%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.67%	-2.84%	-3.83%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-6.83%	-17.28%	+10.45%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.96%	-38.76%	+18.80%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-19.96%	-38.76%	+18.80%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.15%	-5.06%	-0.09%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.93%	-10.68%	+4.75%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.71%	1.04%	+1.67%

Volatility

NIM vs. NMS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Nuveen Select Maturities Municipal Fund (NIM) is 1.60%, while Nuveen Minnesota Quality Municipal Income Fund (NMS) has a volatility of 3.02%. This indicates that NIM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NMS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NIM	NMS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.60%	3.02%	-1.42%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.15%	5.88%	+1.27%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.00%	8.48%	+0.52%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.58%	13.46%	-2.88%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.78%	14.53%	-3.75%

NIM vs. NMS - Expense Ratio Comparison

NIM has a 0.03% expense ratio, which is lower than NMS's 0.03% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

NIM vs. NMS - Dividend Comparison

NIM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.72%, less than NMS's 6.74% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
NIM Nuveen Select Maturities Municipal Fund	3.72%	3.61%	4.10%	3.49%	2.88%	2.69%	3.42%	3.03%	3.27%	3.15%	3.23%	3.27%
NMS Nuveen Minnesota Quality Municipal Income Fund	6.74%	7.29%	6.05%	4.03%	5.24%	4.19%	3.93%	4.05%	5.52%	5.20%	4.68%	5.60%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NIM and NMS in my portfolio?

NIM and NMS have a correlation of 0.25, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NIM or NMS?

NMS has higher volatility (3.02%) compared to NIM (1.60%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NIM dropped -23.09% vs NMS's -38.76%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NMS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.55 vs 0.81), 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.