NZF vs. NEA

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

NZF (Nuveen Municipal Credit Income Fund) is Municipal Bonds fund tracking the S&P National Municipal Bond Index, while NEA (Nuveen AMT-Free Quality Municipal Income Fund) is a stock. Over the past 10 years, NZF returned 3.56%/yr vs 2.97%/yr for NEA. At a 0.49 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. NZF charges 1.89%/yr vs 1.41%/yr for NEA.

Performance

NZF vs. NEA - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NZF achieves a 2.37% return, which is significantly higher than NEA's 1.73% return. Over the past 10 years, NZF has outperformed NEA with an annualized return of 3.56%, while NEA has yielded a comparatively lower 2.97% annualized return.

NZF

• 1D: -0.87%
• 1M: 1.29%
• YTD: 2.37%
• 6M: 1.64%
• 1Y: 14.20%
• 3Y*: 10.44%
• 5Y*: -0.15%
• 10Y*: 3.56%

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%

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

NZF vs. NEA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
NZF Nuveen Municipal Credit Income Fund	2.37%	11.78%	10.09%	2.49%	-25.53%	11.19%	3.58%	28.33%	-6.79%	14.48%
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%

Correlation

The correlation between NZF and NEA is 0.70, 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	0.70
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.78
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.75
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.69
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 25, 2002	0.49

Over the past year, NZF and NEA have become more correlated (0.70) than their long-term average of 0.49, meaning their price movements have been converging.

Return for Risk

NZF vs. NEA — Risk / Return Rank

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

NZF

NZF Risk / Return Rank: 26
NZF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
NZF Sortino Ratio Rank: 28
NZF Omega Ratio Rank: 25
NZF Calmar Ratio Rank: 23
NZF Martin Ratio Rank: 32

NEA

NEA Risk / Return Rank: 78
NEA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
NEA Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
NEA Omega Ratio Rank: 76
NEA Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
NEA Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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.

NZF vs. NEA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Nuveen Municipal Credit Income Fund (NZF) and Nuveen AMT-Free Quality Municipal Income Fund (NEA). 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.

	NZF	NEA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.38	1.39	-0.01
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.18	2.08	+0.10
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.28	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.76	2.02	-0.27
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.24	8.11	-0.87
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

NZF vs. NEA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NZF Sharpe Ratio is 1.38, which is comparable to the NEA Sharpe Ratio of 1.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NZF and NEA, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	NZF	NEA	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.38	1.39	-0.01
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.01	-0.01	-0.01
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.27	0.25	+0.02
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.37	0.32	+0.06

Drawdowns

NZF vs. NEA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NZF drawdown since its inception was -48.55%, which is greater than NEA's maximum drawdown of -43.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NZF and NEA.

Drawdown Indicators

	NZF	NEA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-48.55%	-43.83%	-4.72%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.11%	-7.27%	-0.84%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.59%	-15.16%	-0.43%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-37.42%	-36.57%	-0.85%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-37.42%	-36.57%	-0.85%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.72%	-5.41%	+0.69%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.77%	-8.01%	+0.24%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.97%	1.81%	+0.16%

Volatility

NZF vs. NEA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Nuveen Municipal Credit Income Fund (NZF) is 3.51%, while Nuveen AMT-Free Quality Municipal Income Fund (NEA) has a volatility of 3.80%. This indicates that NZF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NEA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NZF	NEA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.51%	3.80%	-0.29%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.14%	8.50%	-0.36%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.34%	10.59%	-0.25%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.37%	11.49%	+0.88%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.10%	11.81%	+1.29%

NZF vs. NEA - Expense Ratio Comparison

NZF has a 1.89% expense ratio, which is higher than NEA's 1.41% expense ratio.

Dividends

NZF vs. NEA - Dividend Comparison

NZF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.64%, more than NEA's 7.23% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
NZF Nuveen Municipal Credit Income Fund	7.64%	7.58%	6.84%	4.51%	5.80%	4.63%	4.74%	4.82%	6.05%	5.86%	6.26%	5.50%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NZF and NEA in my portfolio?

NZF and NEA have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NZF or NEA?

NEA has higher volatility (3.80%) compared to NZF (3.51%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NZF dropped -48.55% vs NEA's -43.83%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NEA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.39 vs 1.38), 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.