Eaton Vance Municipal Income Closed Fund Cash Flow-to-Debt Ratio
Eaton Vance Municipal Income Closed Fund cash flow-to-debt ratio. Eaton Vance Municipal Income Closed Fund (EVN) has a Cash Flow-to-Debt Ratio of 0.04x as of May 2026, meaning its operating cash flow of $9.57 Million could theoretically repay 0% of its total liabilities ($236.99 Million) in one year. Check Eaton Vance Municipal Income Closed Fund cash earnings quality to evaluate the quality of earnings relative to operating cash generation.
CF-to-Debt Ratio
Operating Cash Flow
Total Liabilities
Data as of
Cash Flow-to-Debt Ratio of Eaton Vance Municipal Income Closed Fund (2002–2025)
Cash flow-to-debt ratio of Eaton Vance Municipal Income Closed Fund from 2002 to 2025. Historical debt coverage capacity for Eaton Vance Municipal Income Closed Fund across 24 annual periods. Check Eaton Vance Municipal Income Closed Fund investment reinvestment rate to assess the company's total reinvestment commitment from operating cash flow.
Eaton Vance Municipal Income Closed Fund Cash Flow-to-Debt Ratio by Year (2002–2025)
Eaton Vance Municipal Income Closed Fund cash flow-to-debt ratio by year from 2002 to 2025. Year-by-year debt coverage analysis for Eaton Vance Municipal Income Closed Fund. For the full cash flow conversion analysis, see Eaton Vance Municipal Income Closed Fund cash conversion from operations.
| 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 | — |