ACES vs NMI
ALPS Clean Energy ETF vs Nuveen Municipal Income Fund Inc.
Quick Verdict
ACES has a lower expense ratio. ACES delivered stronger 1-year returns. NMI offers more diversification with 95 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | ACES | NMI | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.55% | 0.73% | |
| AUM | $109M | - | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.22% | 4.57% | |
| Holdings | 38 | 220 | |
| YTD Return | -4.16% | +11.08% | |
| 1Y Return | +21.72% | +14.95% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | -8.79% | +9.79% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -13.98% | +2.16% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 35.4% | 11.0% | |
| Max Drawdown | -79.0% | -34.4% | |
| Fund Family | ALPS Advisors | Nuveen | |
| Category | Equity | Tax Preferred | |
| Inception | Jun 27, 2018 | Apr 20, 1988 |
ACES vs NMI Performance
ALPS Clean Energy ETF (ACES) is a ETF from ALPS Advisors and Nuveen Municipal Income Fund Inc. (NMI) is a ETF from Nuveen. Over the past year ACES returned +21.72% while NMI returned +14.95%. Year to date, ACES is down 4.16% versus a gain of 11.08% for NMI.
Over three years, ACES compounded at -8.79% per year against +9.79% for NMI; over five years the annualized figures are -13.98% and +2.16% respectively. Across the full 8-year window we track, ACES has the edge at +3.76% annualized vs +0.38%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
ACES has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 35.4% compared with 11.0% for NMI. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -79.0% for ACES and -34.4% for NMI. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.32. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
ACES charges 0.55% per year while NMI charges 0.73%. On a $10,000 position that is $55 vs $73 annually, a gap of $18 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, ACES currently yields 1.22% against 4.57% for NMI.
Holdings Overlap
ACES and NMI share 0 holdings out of 132 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, ACES or NMI?
ACES has an expense ratio of 0.55% while NMI charges 0.73%. ACES is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $18 per year of difference.
Which performed better, ACES or NMI?
Over the past year ACES returned +21.72% vs +14.95% for NMI, so ACES leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (8 years), ACES annualized +3.76% vs +0.38% for NMI. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, ACES or NMI?
ACES has been the more volatile fund at 35.4% annualized versus 11.0% for NMI. Worst drawdown: ACES -79.0% vs NMI -34.4%.
Should I hold both ACES and NMI?
ACES and NMI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.32, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between ACES and NMI?
ACES and NMI share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 132 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, ACES or NMI?
ACES yields 1.22% while NMI yields 4.57%, so NMI currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.