NZF vs VTI
Nuveen Municipal Credit Income Fund vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Quick Verdict
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI delivered stronger 1-year returns. VTI offers more diversification with 3,543 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | NZF | VTI | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 3.61% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | - | $666.9B | |
| Dividend Yield | 7.78% | 1.07% | |
| Holdings | 671 | 3,543 | |
| YTD Return | +1.76% | +13.14% | |
| 1Y Return | +12.18% | +22.35% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +10.68% | +21.83% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -0.83% | +12.01% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 13.0% | 15.3% | |
| Max Drawdown | -53.7% | -56.6% | |
| Fund Family | Nuveen | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Tax Preferred | Equity | |
| Inception | Sep 25, 2001 | May 24, 2001 |
NZF vs VTI Performance
Nuveen Municipal Credit Income Fund (NZF) is a ETF from Nuveen and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year NZF returned +12.18% while VTI returned +22.35%. Year to date, NZF is up 1.76% versus a gain of 13.14% for VTI.
Over three years, NZF compounded at +10.68% per year against +21.83% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are -0.83% and +12.01% respectively. Across the full 25-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +8.09% annualized vs +0.54%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VTI has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.3% compared with 13.0% for NZF. 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 -53.7% for NZF and -56.6% for VTI. 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 0.27. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
NZF charges 3.61% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $361 vs $3 annually, a gap of $358 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, NZF currently yields 7.78% against 1.07% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
NZF and VTI share 0 holdings out of 3041 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, NZF or VTI?
NZF has an expense ratio of 3.61% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $358 per year of difference.
Which performed better, NZF or VTI?
Over the past year NZF returned +12.18% vs +22.35% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (25 years), NZF annualized +0.54% vs +8.09% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, NZF or VTI?
VTI has been the more volatile fund at 15.3% annualized versus 13.0% for NZF. Worst drawdown: NZF -53.7% vs VTI -56.6%.
Should I hold both NZF and VTI?
NZF and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.27, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between NZF and VTI?
NZF and VTI share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 3041 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, NZF or VTI?
NZF yields 7.78% while VTI yields 1.07%, so NZF 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.