UBS Asset Management Income Fund (CIK) vs Nuveen Arizona Quality Municipal Income Fund (NAZ)
Head-to-head comparison of performance, valuation, growth, profitability and dividends. Prices delayed 15 minutes; data as of Oct 8, 2026.
Summary
On valuation, Nuveen Arizona Quality Municipal Income Fund trades at a lower trailing P/E (18.9x vs 77.7x for UBS Asset Management Income Fund). UBS Asset Management Income Fund offers the higher dividend yield (11.37% vs 7.81%).
Summary generated from market data by MetaCap's automated system. Methodology
Head-to-head
| Metric | CIK | NAZ |
|---|---|---|
| Share price | $2.33 | $10.60 |
| 1-day change | 0.00% | -2.12% |
| P/E ratio (TTM) | 77.67 | 18.93 |
| EPS (TTM) | $0.03 | $0.56 |
| Dividend yield | 11.37% | 7.81% |
| Annual dividend | $0.265 | $0.828 |
| 52-week high | $2.98 | $13.42 |
| 52-week low | $2.30 | $10.18 |
| Distance from 52-week high | -21.81% | -21.01% |
| Average volume | 484.28K | 30.58K |
| Sector | Finance | Finance |
| Industry | Finance/Investors Services | Finance/Investors Services |
Highlighted cells mark the higher value for growth, returns, margins and yield, and the lower value for P/E ratios. Highlighting is a mechanical comparison, not a recommendation.
Key differences
- UBS Asset Management Income Fund trades at a higher earnings multiple (77.7x vs 18.9x trailing P/E).
- UBS Asset Management Income Fund offers a meaningfully higher dividend yield (11.37% vs 7.81%).
CIK vs NAZ FAQ
Which has the lower P/E ratio, CIK or NAZ?
NAZ has the lower trailing P/E at 18.9, versus 77.7 for CIK. A lower P/E is not by itself a sign of a better investment; it can reflect slower expected growth or higher risk.
Which pays a higher dividend, UBS Asset Management Income Fund or Nuveen Arizona Quality Municipal Income Fund?
UBS Asset Management Income Fund has the higher yield at 11.37%, compared with 7.81% for Nuveen Arizona Quality Municipal Income Fund.
Are UBS Asset Management Income Fund and Nuveen Arizona Quality Municipal Income Fund in the same industry?
Yes. Both are classified in the Finance/Investors Services industry within the Finance sector.