Eaton Vance Municipal Income Closed Fund (EVN) — Cash Flow-to-Debt Ratio
Eaton Vance Municipal Income Closed Fund (EVN) has a Cash Flow-to-Debt Ratio of 0.04x as of November 2025, meaning its operating cash flow of $8.65 Million could theoretically repay 0% of its total liabilities ($207.34 Million) in one year. Explore how much of Eaton Vance Municipal Income Closed Fund's assets are long-term investments to see how much of total assets are deployed in long-term investments.
CF-to-Debt Ratio
Operating Cash Flow
Total Liabilities
Data as of
Eaton Vance Municipal Income Closed Fund Cash Flow-to-Debt Ratio (2002–2025)
Historical debt coverage capacity for Eaton Vance Municipal Income Closed Fund across 24 annual periods. Also explore Eaton Vance Municipal Income Closed Fund asset portfolio for the complete picture of this company's asset base.
Annual Cash Flow-to-Debt Ratio for Eaton Vance Municipal Income Closed Fund (2002–2025)
Year-by-year debt coverage analysis for Eaton Vance Municipal Income Closed Fund. For market capitalisation and broader financial context, see Eaton Vance Municipal Income Closed Fund stock valuation.
| Year | CF-to-Debt Ratio | Operating CF (USD) | Total Liabilities | YoY Change |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 0.08x | $17.37 Million | $207.34 Million | ▼ -26.6% |
| 2024 | 0.11x | $22.35 Million | $195.76 Million | ▼ -71.9% |
| 2023 | 0.41x | $71.80 Million | $176.88 Million | ▲ +19.7% |
| 2022 | 0.34x | $79.50 Million | $234.45 Million | ▲ +150.5% |
| 2021 | 0.14x | $40.70 Million | $300.65 Million | ▲ +10.1% |
| 2020 | 0.12x | $37.63 Million | $306.18 Million | ▲ +127.8% |
| 2019 | 0.05x | $17.29 Million | $320.51 Million | ▼ -73.7% |
| 2018 | 0.21x | $43.78 Million | $213.03 Million | ▲ +196.6% |
| 2017 | 0.07x | $15.10 Million | $217.95 Million | ▼ -73.0% |
| 2016 | 0.26x | $55.62 Million | $217.03 Million | ▲ +258.9% |
| 2015 | 0.07x | $11.22 Million | $157.16 Million | ▲ +202.1% |
| 2014 | -0.07x | $-9.85 Million | $140.91 Million | ▼ -129.5% |
| 2013 | 0.24x | $26.97 Million | $113.84 Million | ▲ +189.5% |
| 2012 | 0.08x | $10.60 Million | $129.50 Million | ▼ -43.1% |
| 2011 | 0.14x | $18.73 Million | $130.30 Million | ▲ +283.2% |
| 2010 | -0.08x | $-10.05 Million | $128.10 Million | ▼ -311.4% |
| 2009 | 0.04x | $3.11 Million | $83.80 Million | ▼ -97.3% |
| 2008 | 1.40x | $76.63 Million | $54.90 Million | ▲ +161.5% |
| 2007 | 0.53x | $47.18 Million | $88.40 Million | ▲ +192.8% |
| 2006 | 0.18x | $19.61 Million | $107.60 Million | ▼ -94.9% |
| 2005 | 3.58x | $27.60 Million | $7.70 Million | ▼ -79.6% |
| 2004 | 17.60x | $17.60 Million | $1.00 Million | ▼ -76.0% |
| 2003 | 73.26x | $36.63 Million | $500.00K | ▲ +139.7% |
| 2002 | 30.57x | $18.34 Million | $600.00K | — |