NMT vs. DFCMX

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

NMT (Nuveen Massachusetts Quality Municipal Income Fund) and DFCMX (DFA California Short Term Municipal Bond Portfolio) are both Municipal Bonds funds. Over the past 10 years, NMT returned 2.61%/yr vs 1.19%/yr for DFCMX. At a 0.16 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. NMT charges 0.04%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for DFCMX.

Performance

NMT vs. DFCMX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Nuveen Massachusetts Quality Municipal Income Fund (NMT) and DFA California Short Term Municipal Bond Portfolio (DFCMX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NMT achieves a 16.24% return, which is significantly higher than DFCMX's 1.03% return. Over the past 10 years, NMT has outperformed DFCMX with an annualized return of 2.61%, while DFCMX has yielded a comparatively lower 1.19% annualized return.

NMT

• 1D: -1.54%
• 1M: 1.42%
• YTD: 16.24%
• 6M: 15.46%
• 1Y: 15.74%
• 3Y*: 13.68%
• 5Y*: 1.83%
• 10Y*: 2.61%

DFCMX

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.39%
• YTD: 1.03%
• 6M: 1.03%
• 1Y: 2.60%
• 3Y*: 2.64%
• 5Y*: 1.60%
• 10Y*: 1.19%

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

NMT vs. DFCMX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
NMT Nuveen Massachusetts Quality Municipal Income Fund	16.24%	5.77%	16.29%	2.58%	-30.45%	12.42%	6.47%	25.65%	-14.05%	13.80%
DFCMX DFA California Short Term Municipal Bond Portfolio	1.03%	2.55%	2.84%	2.53%	-0.76%	-0.13%	0.67%	1.84%	1.24%	1.07%

Correlation

The correlation between NMT and DFCMX is 0.07, 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	0.07
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.16
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.21
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.16
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 3, 2012	0.16

The correlation between NMT and DFCMX shifts across timeframes, from 0.07 (1 year) to 0.21 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

NMT vs. DFCMX — Risk / Return Rank

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

NMT

NMT Risk / Return Rank: 41
NMT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
NMT Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
NMT Omega Ratio Rank: 39
NMT Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
NMT Martin Ratio Rank: 43

DFCMX

DFCMX Risk / Return Rank: 99
DFCMX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
DFCMX Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
DFCMX Omega Ratio Rank: 100
DFCMX Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
DFCMX Martin Ratio Rank: 99

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.

NMT vs. DFCMX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Nuveen Massachusetts Quality Municipal Income Fund (NMT) and DFA California Short Term Municipal Bond Portfolio (DFCMX). 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.

	NMT	DFCMX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.59	4.46	-2.87
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.23	10.44	-8.20
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	4.85	-3.54
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.71	12.81	-10.10
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.72	43.93	-35.21

NMT vs. DFCMX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NMT Sharpe Ratio is 1.59, which is lower than the DFCMX Sharpe Ratio of 4.46. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NMT and DFCMX, 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

NMT vs. DFCMX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NMT drawdown since its inception was -40.12%, which is greater than DFCMX's maximum drawdown of -2.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NMT and DFCMX.

Drawdown Indicators

	NMT	DFCMX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-40.12%	-2.20%	-37.92%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.84%	-0.20%	-5.64%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.28%	-0.68%	-12.60%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-38.88%	-2.20%	-36.68%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-38.88%	-2.20%	-36.68%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.43%	0.00%	-3.43%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.44%	-0.25%	-8.19%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.81%	0.06%	+1.75%

Volatility

NMT vs. DFCMX - Volatility Comparison

Nuveen Massachusetts Quality Municipal Income Fund (NMT) has a higher volatility of 2.90% compared to DFA California Short Term Municipal Bond Portfolio (DFCMX) at 0.18%. This indicates that NMT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than DFCMX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NMT	DFCMX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.90%	0.18%	+2.72%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.47%	0.39%	+8.08%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.94%	0.59%	+9.35%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.32%	0.89%	+11.43%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.07%	0.88%	+13.19%

NMT vs. DFCMX - Expense Ratio Comparison

NMT has a 0.04% expense ratio, which is lower than DFCMX's 0.19% 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

NMT vs. DFCMX - Dividend Comparison

NMT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.10%, more than DFCMX's 2.47% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
DFCMX DFA California Short Term Municipal Bond Portfolio	2.47%	2.23%	2.61%	1.70%	0.71%	0.36%	0.87%	1.43%	1.04%	0.87%	0.86%	0.82%
NMT Nuveen Massachusetts Quality Municipal Income Fund	6.10%	7.27%	5.94%	3.06%	4.50%	3.43%	3.60%	3.46%	4.66%	4.57%	5.30%	5.15%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NMT and DFCMX in my portfolio?

NMT and DFCMX have a correlation of 0.07, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NMT or DFCMX?

NMT has higher volatility (2.90%) compared to DFCMX (0.18%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NMT dropped -40.12% vs DFCMX's -2.20%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DFCMX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.46 vs 1.59), 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.