CEV vs MUC: Correlation
Measured on weekly returns over the past three years, Eaton Vance California Municipal Income Trust Shares of (CEV) and Blackrock MuniHoldings California Quality Fund, Inc. (MUC) carry a correlation of 0.79, a strong link.
Data as of 2026-08-27 · refreshed every trading day · weekly returns · methodology
How correlated are CEV and MUC?
On 3 years of weekly data the CEV/MUC correlation comes out at 0.79, strong. The past 12 months show a weaker link (0.67) than the 3-year average (0.79). The 5-year figure is 0.79, and annualized covariance runs at 94.6 %².
Few assets follow CEV as closely as MUC, which ranks #1 of 12 tracked partners. On 12-month performance CEV holds a 8.1-point edge, +19.0% against +10.9%.
How is this computed?
Pearson correlation on weekly returns: ρ(A,B) = cov(rA, rB) / (σA · σB), over windows of 52, 156 and 260 weeks. Covariance is annualized (×52) and expressed in %². Full definitions on the methodology page.
CEV vs MUC: side by side
| CEV (Eaton Vance California Municipal Income Trust Shares of) | MUC (Blackrock MuniHoldings California Quality Fund, Inc.) | |
|---|---|---|
| 1-year return | +19.0% | +10.9% |
| 5-year return | -1.8% | -13.2% |
| Volatility (ann.) | 10.9% | 10.9% |
| Beta vs S&P 500 | 0.23 | 0.25 |
| Max drawdown (3Y) | -12.4% | -10.7% |
| Market cap | $0.1B | $1.0B |
| P/E (trailing) | 10.2 | 46.3 |
| Dividend yield | 5.54% | 6.04% |
| Sector / category | US Listed | US Listed |
Year-by-year returns
| Year | CEV | MUC |
|---|---|---|
| 2022 | -22.7% | -26.8% |
| 2023 | +8.2% | +7.9% |
| 2024 | +2.3% | +0.8% |
| 2025 | +6.2% | +6.0% |
| 2026 | +10.2% | +4.6% |
Calendar-year price returns; the current year is year-to-date as of the data date above.
Are CEV and MUC good diversifiers for each other?
Somewhat, no more. With 0.79 correlation, most large moves hit both names, and the diversification benefit stays modest.
FAQ
What is the correlation between CEV and MUC?
As of 2026-08-27, the correlation of weekly returns between CEV and MUC is 0.79 over 3 years, 0.67 over 1 year and 0.79 over 5 years.
Is MUC a good diversifier for CEV?
Somewhat, no more. With 0.79 correlation, most large moves hit both names, and the diversification benefit stays modest.
What does a correlation of 0.79 mean?
On the −1 to +1 scale, 0.79 describes how much the two returns move together: +1 is lockstep, 0 is independence, negative values mean opposite directions. It says nothing about which performed better.
Use this data
$ curl https://www.pairbook.io/api/v1/pairs/cev-vs-muc.json
Markdown for the live badge, attribution link included:
[](https://www.pairbook.io/pair/cev-vs-muc/)
No key needed, free to use. Full endpoint list in the API documentation.
Related comparisons
Hubs: CEV correlations · MUC correlations
