NIM vs. NMS
Compare and contrast key facts about Nuveen Select Maturities Municipal Fund (NIM) and Nuveen Minnesota Quality Municipal Income Fund (NMS).
NIM is managed by Nuveen. It was launched on Sep 18, 1992. NMS is managed by Nuveen. It was launched on Jun 25, 1993.
Performance
NIM vs. NMS - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
NIM vs. NMS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NIM Nuveen Select Maturities Municipal Fund | 2.42% | 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 | 5.76% | 2.10% | 19.59% | 1.57% | -21.89% | 5.47% | 5.80% | 25.72% | -13.31% | -1.58% |
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, NIM achieves a 2.42% return, which is significantly lower than NMS's 5.76% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with NIM having a 2.14% annualized return and NMS not far behind at 2.13%.
NIM
- 1D
- 1.94%
- 1M
- -2.03%
- YTD
- 2.42%
- 6M
- 3.94%
- 1Y
- 5.17%
- 3Y*
- 4.61%
- 5Y*
- 0.77%
- 10Y*
- 2.14%
NMS
- 1D
- 1.12%
- 1M
- 0.47%
- YTD
- 5.76%
- 6M
- 5.82%
- 1Y
- 9.04%
- 3Y*
- 6.52%
- 5Y*
- 1.26%
- 10Y*
- 2.13%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
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%.
Return for Risk
NIM vs. NMS — Risk / Return Rank
NIM
NMS
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.
| NIM | NMS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 0.51 | 1.01 | -0.50 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 0.80 | 1.44 | -0.65 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.10 | 1.20 | -0.10 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.05 | 1.78 | -0.73 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.21 | 3.74 | -0.53 |
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 graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| NIM | NMS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.51 | 1.01 | -0.50 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.07 | 0.09 | -0.02 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.20 | 0.15 | +0.05 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.24 | 0.22 | +0.01 |
Correlation
The correlation between NIM and NMS is 0.16, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.
Dividends
NIM vs. NMS - Dividend Comparison
NIM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.60%, less than NMS's 6.83% yield.
| TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NIM Nuveen Select Maturities Municipal Fund | 3.60% | 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 | 6.83% | 7.29% | 6.05% | 4.03% | 5.24% | 4.19% | 3.93% | 4.05% | 5.52% | 5.20% | 4.68% | 5.60% |
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.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| NIM | NMS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -23.09% | -38.76% | +15.67% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.03% | -5.07% | -0.96% |
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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.21% | -5.09% | +0.88% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.93% | -10.81% | +4.88% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.96% | 2.41% | -0.45% |
Volatility
NIM vs. NMS - Volatility Comparison
Nuveen Select Maturities Municipal Fund (NIM) has a higher volatility of 4.49% compared to Nuveen Minnesota Quality Municipal Income Fund (NMS) at 2.88%. This indicates that NIM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than NMS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| NIM | NMS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.49% | 2.88% | +1.61% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.22% | 5.95% | +1.27% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.17% | 8.95% | +1.22% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 10.66% | 14.10% | -3.44% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 10.78% | 14.63% | -3.85% |