PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
NMS vs. JQC
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

NMS vs. JQC - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NMS achieves a 7.31% return, which is significantly higher than JQC's 0.73% return. Over the past 10 years, NMS has underperformed JQC with an annualized return of 1.97%, while JQC has yielded a comparatively higher 5.78% annualized return.


NMS

1D
0.12%
1M
0.92%
YTD
7.31%
6M
5.39%
1Y
15.23%
3Y*
9.90%
5Y*
-0.31%
10Y*
1.97%

JQC

1D
-0.83%
1M
1.03%
YTD
0.73%
6M
0.62%
1Y
2.31%
3Y*
11.73%
5Y*
4.75%
10Y*
5.78%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

NMS vs. JQC - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
NMS
Nuveen Minnesota Quality Municipal Income Fund
7.31%2.10%19.59%1.57%-21.89%5.47%5.80%25.72%-13.31%-1.58%
JQC
Nuveen Credit Strategies Income Fund
0.73%-0.36%22.29%15.26%-14.22%13.29%-2.96%21.78%-4.33%-0.27%

Correlation

The correlation between NMS and JQC is 0.13, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.13

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

0.22

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

0.16

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

0.11

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 9, 2014

0.09

The correlation between NMS and JQC shifts across timeframes, from 0.09 (all time) to 0.22 (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

NMS vs. JQC — Risk / Return Rank

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

NMS
NMS Risk / Return Rank: 6262
Overall Rank
NMS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NMS Sortino Ratio Rank: 4646
Sortino Ratio Rank
NMS Omega Ratio Rank: 4646
Omega Ratio Rank
NMS Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
NMS Martin Ratio Rank: 8282
Martin Ratio Rank

JQC
JQC Risk / Return Rank: 44
Overall Rank
JQC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
Sharpe Ratio Rank
JQC Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
Sortino Ratio Rank
JQC Omega Ratio Rank: 44
Omega Ratio Rank
JQC Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
Calmar Ratio Rank
JQC Martin Ratio Rank: 33
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.

NMS vs. JQC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Nuveen Minnesota Quality Municipal Income Fund (NMS) and Nuveen Credit Strategies Income Fund (JQC). 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.


NMSJQCDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.70

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.47

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.37

1.05

+0.32

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.38

0.23

+5.16

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

15.35

0.46

+14.89

NMS vs. JQC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NMS Sharpe Ratio is 1.91, which is higher than the JQC Sharpe Ratio of 0.21. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NMS and JQC, 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


NMSJQCDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.91

0.21

+1.70

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.02

0.36

-0.39

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.14

0.33

-0.19

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.23

0.23

0.00

Drawdowns

NMS vs. JQC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NMS drawdown since its inception was -38.76%, smaller than the maximum JQC drawdown of -75.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NMS and JQC.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


NMSJQCDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-38.76%

-75.18%

+36.42%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.84%

-10.15%

+7.31%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.28%

-15.37%

-1.91%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-38.76%

-19.83%

-18.93%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-38.76%

-47.99%

+9.23%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.69%

-5.34%

+1.65%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.71%

-8.82%

-1.89%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.99%

5.04%

-4.05%

Volatility

NMS vs. JQC - Volatility Comparison

Nuveen Minnesota Quality Municipal Income Fund (NMS) has a higher volatility of 2.65% compared to Nuveen Credit Strategies Income Fund (JQC) at 2.16%. This indicates that NMS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than JQC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


NMSJQCDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.65%

2.16%

+0.49%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.25%

8.80%

-3.55%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

8.02%

11.11%

-3.09%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.43%

13.17%

+0.26%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.58%

17.56%

-2.98%

NMS vs. JQC - Expense Ratio Comparison

NMS has a 0.03% expense ratio, which is lower than JQC's 4.34% expense ratio.


Dividends

NMS vs. JQC - Dividend Comparison

NMS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.69%, less than JQC's 13.22% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
JQC
Nuveen Credit Strategies Income Fund
13.22%12.91%11.39%11.42%9.71%10.03%16.11%16.14%6.53%7.42%6.99%7.51%
NMS
Nuveen Minnesota Quality Municipal Income Fund
6.69%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


NMS and JQC have a correlation of 0.13, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

NMS has higher volatility (2.65%) compared to JQC (2.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NMS dropped -38.76% vs JQC's -75.18%.

NMS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.91 vs 0.21), 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 NMS and JQC

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