PZA vs. NVDW
PZA (Invesco National AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF) and NVDW (Roundhill ETF Trust Roundhill NVDA WeeklyPay ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PZA is a Municipal Bonds fund tracking the BofA ML National Long-Term Core Plus Municipal Securities Index, while NVDW is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Roundhill. PZA is passively managed, while NVDW is actively managed. Over the past year, PZA returned 8.99% vs 59.61% for NVDW. At a correlation of -0.00, they often move in opposite directions. PZA charges 0.28%/yr vs 0.99%/yr for NVDW.
Performance
PZA vs. NVDW - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PZA achieves a 2.60% return, which is significantly lower than NVDW's 18.30% return.
PZA
- 1D
- 0.26%
- 1M
- 1.10%
- YTD
- 2.60%
- 6M
- 2.86%
- 1Y
- 8.99%
- 3Y*
- 3.37%
- 5Y*
- 0.03%
- 10Y*
- 1.90%
NVDW
- 1D
- 2.02%
- 1M
- 13.37%
- YTD
- 18.30%
- 6M
- 20.44%
- 1Y
- 59.61%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PZA vs. NVDW - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
PZA Invesco National AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF | 2.60% | 6.51% |
NVDW Roundhill ETF Trust Roundhill NVDA WeeklyPay ETF | 18.30% | 40.00% |
Correlation
The correlation between PZA and NVDW is 0.00, 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 | 0.00 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 3, 2025 | -0.00 |
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
PZA vs. NVDW — Risk / Return Rank
PZA
NVDW
PZA vs. NVDW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco National AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF (PZA) and Roundhill ETF Trust Roundhill NVDA WeeklyPay ETF (NVDW). 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.
| PZA | NVDW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.68 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.05 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.46 | 1.25 | +0.22 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.84 | 2.35 | +0.49 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 10.03 | 5.69 | +4.34 |
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 charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| PZA | NVDW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.14 | 1.46 | +0.68 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.00 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.27 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.43 | 1.59 | -1.16 |
Drawdowns
PZA vs. NVDW - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PZA drawdown since its inception was -24.49%, roughly equal to the maximum NVDW drawdown of -25.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PZA and NVDW.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PZA | NVDW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -24.49% | -25.54% | +1.05% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -3.18% | -25.54% | +22.36% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -7.89% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -18.55% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -21.69% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.98% | -8.85% | +7.87% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.95% | -8.19% | +4.24% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.90% | 10.51% | -9.61% |
Volatility
PZA vs. NVDW - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco National AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF (PZA) is 1.49%, while Roundhill ETF Trust Roundhill NVDA WeeklyPay ETF (NVDW) has a volatility of 14.99%. This indicates that PZA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NVDW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PZA | NVDW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.49% | 14.99% | -13.50% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.90% | 30.78% | -27.88% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.23% | 41.06% | -36.83% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 6.00% | 41.11% | -35.11% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 7.08% | 41.11% | -34.03% |
PZA vs. NVDW - Expense Ratio Comparison
PZA has a 0.28% expense ratio, which is lower than NVDW's 0.99% expense ratio.
Dividends
PZA vs. NVDW - Dividend Comparison
PZA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.63%, less than NVDW's 57.01% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NVDW Roundhill ETF Trust Roundhill NVDA WeeklyPay ETF | 57.01% | 38.94% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
PZA Invesco National AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF | 3.63% | 3.55% | 3.22% | 2.91% | 2.68% | 2.34% | 2.44% | 2.81% | 3.19% | 3.04% | 3.23% | 3.59% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PZA and NVDW have a correlation of 0.00, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
NVDW has higher volatility (14.99%) compared to PZA (1.49%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PZA dropped -24.49% vs NVDW's -25.54%.
On 1-year performance, NVDW leads with 59.61% vs 8.99% for PZA. On fees, PZA is cheaper at 0.28% per year. On volatility, PZA has been the lower-risk option at 1.49%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, NVDW has performed better with a 59.61% return vs 8.99%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PZA is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for NVDW.
NVDW has the higher dividend yield at 57.01%, compared with 3.63% for PZA.
PZA is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while NVDW is Derivative Income. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Roundhill. Their fees differ too: 0.28% for PZA and 0.99% for NVDW.
PZA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.14 vs 1.46), 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.
Find the right allocation for PZA and NVDW
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