MERRILL LYNCH
MULTI-STATE
LIMITED MATURITY
MUNICIPAL
SERIES TRUST
FUND LOGO
Quarterly Report
October 31, 1995
This report is not authorized for use as an offer of sale or a
solicitation of an offer to buy shares of the Fund unless
accompanied or preceded by the Fund's current prospectus. Past
performance results shown in this report should not be considered a
representation of future performance. Investment return and
principal value of shares will fluctuate so that shares, when
redeemed,may be worth more or less than their original cost.
<PAGE>
Merrill Lynch Multi-State
Limited Maturity
Municipal Series Trust
Box 9011
Princeton, NJ
08543-9011
Merrill Lynch Multi-State Limited Maturity Municipal Series Trust
<PAGE>
Officers and
Trustees
Arthur Zeikel, President and Trustee
James H. Bodurtha, Trustee
Herbert I. London, Trustee
Robert R. Martin, Trustee
Joseph L. May, Trustee
Andre F. Perold, Trustee
Terry K. Glenn, Executive Vice President
Vincent R. Giordano, Senior Vice President
Donald C. Burke, Vice President
Peter J. Hayes, Vice President
Kenneth A. Jacob, Vice President
Gerald M. Richard, Treasurer
Robert Harris, Secretary
Custodian
The Bank of New York
90 Washington Street, 12th Floor
New York, New York 10005
Transfer Agent
Merrill Lynch Financial Data Services, Inc.
Transfer Agency Mutual Fund Operations
4800 Deer Lake Drive East
Jacksonville, Florida 32246-6484
(800) 637-3863
TO OUR SHAREHOLDERS
After losing momentum through the second calendar quarter of 1995,
it now appears that the US economic expansion has resumed. Gross
domestic product (GDP) growth for the three months ended September
30 was reported to be 4.2%, higher than generally expected.
September durable goods orders increased a surprisingly strong 3%,
and existing home sales rose to a near-record level. At the same
time, there is evidence that inflationary pressures remain subdued.
Reflecting the trend of renewed economic growth--and continued good
news on the inflation front--the Federal Reserve Board signaled no
near-term shift in monetary policy following its September meeting.
Thus, official interest rates may not be reduced further in the
immediate future.
One of the major developments during the October quarter was the
strengthening of the US dollar relative to the yen and the
Deutschemark. Improving interest rate differentials favoring the US
currency, combined with coordinated central bank intervention and
more positive investor sentiment, have helped to bolster the dollar
in foreign exchange markets. Other factors that appear to be
improving the US dollar's outlook in the near term are a pick-up in
capital flows to the United States and the prospect of increased
capital outflows from Japan. However, it remains to be seen if the
US dollar's strengthening trend can continue without significant
improvements in the US budget and trade deficits.
<PAGE>
In the weeks ahead, investor interest will continue to focus on US
economic activity. Clear signs of a moderate, noninflationary
expansion could further benefit the US stock and bond markets. In
addition, should the current Federal budget deficit reduction
efforts now underway in Washington prove successful, the
implications would likely be positive for the US financial markets.
The Municipal Market
Tax-exempt bond yields continued to decline during the three-month
period ended October 31, 1995. As measured by the Bond Buyer Revenue
Bond Index, the yield on uninsured, long-term municipal revenue
bonds fell 25 basis points (0.25%) to end the October period at
approximately 6.00%. While tax-exempt bond yields have declined
dramatically from their highs one year ago, municipal bond yields
have exhibited considerable yield volatility on a weekly basis. US
Treasury bond yields have displayed similar volatility, but the
extent of their decline has been greater. By the end of October,
long-term US Treasury bond yields had declined almost 50 basis
points to 6.33%. Proposed Federal tax restructuring continued to
weigh heavily on the tax-exempt bond market. Thus far in 1995, US
Treasury bond yields have declined approximately 150 basis points.
Municipal bond yields have fallen approximately 95 basis points as
the uncertainty surrounding any changes to the existing Federal
income tax structure has prevented the municipal bond market from
rallying as strongly as its taxable counterpart.
A general view of a moderately expanding domestic economy, supported
by a very favorable inflationary environment, allowed interest rates
to significantly decline from their recent highs in November 1994.
However, this decline was not a smooth downward curve. Conflicting
economic indicators were released during recent months that have
prevented a clear consensus regarding the near-term direction of
interest rates from being reached. The resultant uncertainty has
promoted more of a saw-toothed pattern as interest rate declines
were repeatedly interrupted by indications of stronger-than-
expected economic growth. As these concerns were overcome by
subsequent weaker economic releases, interest rate declines have
resumed. These periods of volatility are likely to continue for the
remainder of 1995, or until proposed Federal budget deficit
reduction packages are resolved and any resultant responses by the
Federal Reserve Board have occurred.
<PAGE>
However, the municipal bond market's technical position remained
supportive throughout recent quarters. Approximately $38 billion in
long-term municipal securities were issued during the three months
ended October 31, 1995. While this issuance is virtually identical
to underwritings during the October 31, 1994 quarter, tax-exempt
bond issuance over the last 12 months remained approximately 25%
below comparable 1994 levels. The municipal bond market should
maintain this positive technical position well into 1996. Annual
issuance for 1995 is now projected to be approximately $140 billion,
significantly less than last year's already low level of $162
billion. Projected maturities and early redemptions for the
remainder of 1995 and throughout 1996 will lead to a continued
decline in the total outstanding municipal bond supply throughout
1996 and, perhaps, into 1998, should new bond issuance remain at
historically low levels.
Despite the municipal bond market's relative underperformance
compared to the US Treasury market thus far in 1995, the extent of
the tax-exempt bond market's rally was nonetheless quite impressive.
Municipal bond yields have fallen 135 basis points from their highs
reached in November 1994 and municipal bond prices rose accordingly.
Most tax-exempt products recouped almost all of the losses incurred
in 1994 and are well on their way to posting double-digit total
returns for all of 1995. This relative underperformance so far in
1995 provided long-term investors with the rare opportunity to
purchase tax-exempt securities at yield levels near those of taxable
securities.
Additionally, many of the factors that led to the relative
underperformance of the tax-exempt bond market thus far in 1995,
namely investor concern regarding Federal budget deficit reductions
and proposed changes in the Federal income tax structure, are
nearing resolution. The Federal budget reconciliation process has
already begun, and may be essentially completed by year-end. Recent
public opinion polls suggest that the majority of American taxpayers
prefer the existing Federal income tax system compared to proposed
changes, such as the flat tax or national sales tax. In an upcoming
election year, neither party is likely to advocate a clearly
unpopular position, particularly one that can be expected to
negatively affect the Federal budget deficit reduction program
through reduced tax revenues. As these factors are resolved, we
believe that much of the resistance that the municipal bond market
has met this year may dissipate, allowing municipal bond yields to
return to more normal historic yield relationships to taxable
securities.
Portfolio Strategy
Merrill Lynch Arizona Limited
Maturity Municipal Bond Fund
The State of Arizona continues to be a bright spot for growth in the
United States. New industry continues to be the catalyst for further
economic growth within the State, spurring the growth of ancillary
areas such as the housing and service industries. This boom enabled
the State to finish its fiscal year 1995 with a record $270 million
General Fund surplus. This brings the State's total Rainy Day Fund
to $493 million. Nonetheless, Governor Fife Symington is requiring
that all State agencies submit zero growth budgets in an effort to
cap the size of the State's government and retain this generous
reserve fund balance.
<PAGE>
During the October 31, 1995 quarter, we continued to employ a
strategy of purchasing AA-rated or better or insured bonds because
of the liquidity they provide. We reduced our cash position to its
lowest level this year, approximately 22%, with purchases of AA-
rated general obligation bonds. A decline in Arizona state-specific
issuance as well as a growing belief that the Federal Reserve Board
would continue to lower interest rates was the foundation for this
strategy. By October 31, 1995, our focus on barbelling the portfolio
(that is, the purchase of longer-term bonds coupled with purchases
of very short maturing bonds) as well as our concentration on highly
rated, very liquid bonds, enabled us to capitalize on this year's
decline in interest rates and realize significant price
appreciation.
Merrill Lynch California Limited
Maturity Municipal Bond Fund
During the quarter ended October 31, 1995, Standard & Poor's Corp.
affirmed its single A rating on California's $18.4 billion
outstanding general obligation debt, citing the State's broad
economic base which is showing a sluggish recovery after a long and
deep recession and an improving financial position in relation to
revenues generated. The State still maintains a substantial
accumulated deficit. Several structural budget impediments including
mandated school funding levels, and a two-thirds legislative vote
required for budget passage only add to the State's future fiscal
uncertainties. California continues to maintain moderate but growing
debt levels. State Comptroller Kathleen Connell has said the State
must avoid additional budget cuts and budget crises by eliminating
the State's debtor mentality of constantly borrowing to pay off its
bills.
The aggressive investment posture we adopted through the first two
calendar quarters of 1995 for Merrill Lynch California Limited
Maturity Municipal Bond Fund was maintained throughout the year. The
Fund's average maturity was held at approximately 4 years, 11 months
to enhance yield during a period which saw the tax-exempt market
trading in a very flat range because of the Federal Reserve Board's
decision to leave interest rates unchanged. We will continue to
maintain this fully extended maturity stance in anticipation of
continued slow-to-moderate economic growth. This growth would allow
the Federal Reserve Board to adjust monetary policy from its current
restrictive stance to a more neutral posture in the months ahead.
Diversification, credit quality and yield remain paramount to the
Fund, and we will continue to closely monitor the everchanging
marketplace.
<PAGE>
Merrill Lynch Florida Limited
Maturity Municipal Bond Fund
During the quarter ended October 31, 1995, the State of Florida
continued to show strong economic growth. Since the 1990--1992
recession, Florida has outperformed the nation in employment and
personal income growth. High population growth, especially in the
Jacksonville area, has given strength to the State's retail and
service sectors but has also put pressure on government services for
education, corrections, transportation and health and human
services. The State has met these funding challenges despite a
narrow tax base, principally sales taxes, which are vulnerable to
economic cycles. The State has now attempted to insulate itself from
any economic downturn through the establishment of a Constitutional
Budget Stabilization Reserve Fund and a manageable constitutional
state revenue limitation. One recent indicator of Florida's economic
health is housing sales. Bolstered by lower interest rates, sales of
existing homes rose 12% in August from the same period a year
before. Interest rates for a 30-year fixed mortgage were about 7.86%
compared to 8.51% one year ago.
The aggressive investment posture we adopted through the first two
calendar quarters of 1995 for Merrill Lynch Florida Limited Maturity
Municipal Bond Fund was maintained throughout the year. The Fund's
average maturity was held at approximately 4 years, 10 months to
enhance yield during a period which saw the tax-exempt market
trading in a very flat range because of the Federal Reserve Board's
decision to leave interest rates unchanged as it continues to
decipher mixed economic reports. We will continue to maintain this
fully extended maturity stance in anticipation of continued slow-to-
moderate economic growth. This growth would allow the Federal
Reserve Board to adjust monetary policy from its current restrictive
stance to a more neutral posture in the months ahead.
Diversification, credit quality and yield remain paramount to the
Fund, and we will continue to closely monitor the everchanging
marketplace.
Merrill Lynch Massachusetts Limited
Maturity Municipal Bond Fund
Economic activity within the Commonwealth of Massachusetts slowed
somewhat during the three-month period ended October 31, 1995. The
Federal Reserve Board's economic data indicated a modest housing
market and relatively soft retail sales for the Boston region. The
Commonwealth continues to retain diverse sources of strength and
generates relatively high personal incomes, although defense
procurement cutbacks and healthcare industry restructuring will rein
in the pace of economic growth relative to the rest of the nation.
<PAGE>
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts ended its fiscal year 1995 with
tax revenues up 5.4% over fiscal year 1994. This contributed to a
cash balance of $372 million in the undesignated General Fund and
$385 million in the Stabilization Fund. Governor Weld put forth his
1996 budget of $16.8 billion, allowing for approximately a 2.6%
increase in spending over fiscal year 1995. Governor Weld's 1996
budget projects a fiscal year 1996 ending balance of approximately
$505 million, of which approximately $419 million will be in the
Stabilization Fund. This budget continues Governor Weld's efforts of
fiscal responsibility and enhances the Commonwealth's ability to
maintain high credit ratings. For the first three months of fiscal
year 1996, the Commonwealth reported tax revenue collections to be
$2.8 billion or 6.5% over the comparable period last year.
Merrill Lynch Massachusetts Limited Maturity Municipal Bond Fund
continued to be aggressively positioned for the three-month period
ended October 31, 1995. The Federal Reserve Board's lowering of its
key interest rates in early July signaled a change in monetary
policy from a restrictive to a slightly more neutral stance. We
continued to maintain low cash reserves of approximately 11%, while
barbelling the portfolio with longer-dated securities in order to
maintain as aggressive an average portfolio maturity as allowable.
This average portfolio maturity continued to be just under the five-
year maximum as outlined in the Fund's prospectus. This investment
approach enabled the Fund to take advantage of any fall in interest
rates through the price appreciation of municipal bonds.
Additionally, municipal bonds in the seven-year--ten year maturity
range offered the greatest value compared to their taxable
counterparts along the zero--ten-year portion of the yield curve. We
continue to closely monitor credit quality and look for
opportunities to diversify the Fund.
Merrill Lynch Michigan Limited
Maturity Municipal Bond Fund
During the quarter ended October 31, 1995, the Michigan Employment
Security Commission reported that unemployment fell in September
1995 to 4.8% from 5.4% a year ago. This drop reflects the lingering
strength from last year's manufacturing boom. Many economists expect
the trend not to last as slower sales of cars and other durable
goods force plants to scale back production in fourth quarter 1995
and into 1996. This could cause spending cutbacks which could hurt
other parts of the State's economy such as restaurants and
retailers. The University of Michigan's Consumer Sentiment Index
fell to 88.9 in September from 96.2 in August. This drop correlated
with the National Conference Board Consumer Confidence Index
slipping to 97.4 in September from 102.4 in August. Sales in the
auto industry are expected to fall below last year's 15.1 million
vehicles to about 14.7 million vehicles. About 16% of Michigan's
work force is employed directly or indirectly by auto makers.
<PAGE>
The aggressive investment posture we adopted through the first two
calendar quarters of 1995 for Merrill Lynch Michigan Limited
Maturity Municipal Bond Fund was maintained throughout the year. The
Fund's average maturity was held at approximately 4 years, 10 months
to enhance yield during a period which saw the tax-exempt market
trading in a very flat range because of the Federal Reserve Board's
decision to leave interest rates unchanged as it continues to
decipher mixed economic reports. We will continue to maintain this
fully extended maturity stance in anticipation of continued slow-to-
moderate economic growth. This growth would allow the Federal
Reserve Board to adjust monetary policy from its current restrictive
stance to a more neutral posture in the months ahead.
Diversification, credit quality and yield remain paramount to the
Fund, and we will continue to closely monitor the everchanging
marketplace.
Merrill Lynch New Jersey Limited
Maturity Municipal Bond Fund
In the most recent period, the Northeast continued to suffer the ill
effects of corporate restructuring, mergers and downsizing. The
State of New Jersey's economy was no exception and continued to
worsen in the most recent quarter. Particular areas of weakness
included the retail and manufacturing sectors. However, despite an
unemployment rate of 5.8% for the month of October 1995, the economy
has shown improvement over the last 12 months when the unemployment
rate stood at 6.9%. The October quarter was mixed in terms of
economic news for the nation as a whole. Strong housing reports
contrasted sharply with weakness in retail sales and declines in
consumer confidence.
In Merrill Lynch New Jersey Limited Maturity Municipal Bond Fund, we
reduced our cash position by approximately 10%--15%, ending the
period with cash reserves of around 16%. We continued to maintain an
average portfolio maturity in the five-year range, the maximum
allowed as outlined in the Fund's prospectus. Our investment focus
this quarter consisted of the purchase of general obligation notes
and bonds with an underlying rating of AA or better because of the
excellent liquidity these bonds provide. This strategy allowed the
Fund to enhance its return by capitalizing on this year's decline in
interest rates, particularly in an environment of reduced municipal
bond issuance.
Merrill Lynch New York Limited
Maturity Municipal Bond Fund
During the quarter ended October 31, 1995, the New York State
economic picture continued to be mixed. In October, the New York
unemployment rate fell to 6.3% from 6.8% in September, although this
was because of people pulling out of the labor market rather than
any job creation in the State. The continued generation of private
sector jobs and an increase in manufacturing employment, both at a
rate above the national average, has continued to slowly push along
the State's lumbering economy. During this stage of an economic
upturn, most states have used the recovery to replenish reserve
funds that were drawn down during the most recent recession. Despite
the improved economic performance in New York State in the 1993--
1995 period, the State still projects future-year budget gaps which
could leave the State's finances vulnerable to the nation's next
cyclical downturn.
<PAGE>
New York State, its authorities and New York City plan to sell a
total of $4.7 billion of tax-exempt securities in the fourth quarter
of 1995, which is 36% less than the $7.3 billion in sales planned
for the third quarter of 1995. Debt issuance slowed in the first
half of 1995 after the 68-day budget approval delay caused the
postponement of many state agency debt sales.
The aggressive investment posture we adopted through the first two
calendar quarters of 1995 for Merrill Lynch New York Limited
Maturity Municipal Bond Fund was maintained throughout the year. The
Fund's average maturity was held at approximately 4 years, 11 months
to enhance yield during a period which saw the tax-exempt market
trading in a very flat range because of the Federal Reserve Board's
decision to leave interest rates unchanged as it continues to
decipher mixed economic reports. We will continue to maintain this
fully extended maturity stance in anticipation of continued slow-to-
moderate economic growth. This growth would allow the Federal
Reserve Board to adjust monetary policy from its current restrictive
stance to a more neutral posture in the months ahead.
Diversification, credit quality and yield remain paramount to the
Fund, and we will continue to closely monitor the everchanging
marketplace.
Merrill Lynch Pennsylvania Limited
Maturity Municipal Bond Fund
In the most recent period, the Northeast continued to suffer the ill
effects of corporate restructuring, mergers and downsizing. However,
for the first time this year the economy of the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania showed a slight improvement in manufacturing activity.
This renewed strength is visible in the Commonwealth's unemployment
rate, which for the month of October was 5.1%, down from 6.4% in
September and 5.5% in August, and below the national average of
5.5%. The State's current seasonally adjusted unemployment rate of
5.1% is also a significant decrease from the October 1994
unemployment rate of 6.0%. Throughout this past year, the service
industry has been the largest contributor to this decline. In the
most recent period, we continued to follow the investment strategy
we have utilized all year. By October 31, 1995, our focus on
barbelling the portfolio (that is, the purchase of longer bonds
coupled with purchases of very short maturing bonds), as well as our
concentration on highly rated, very liquid bonds, has enabled us to
capitalize on this year's decline in interest rates and realize
significant price appreciation. At the end of the October quarter,
we maintained an average portfolio maturity of 4 years, 8 months and
held cash reserves of about 22%.
<PAGE>
In Conclusion
We appreciate your ongoing interest in Merrill Lynch Multi-State
Limited Maturity Municipal Series Trust, and we look forward to
assisting you with your financial needs in the months and years
ahead.
Sincerely,
(Arthur Zeikel)
Arthur Zeikel
President
(Vincent R. Giordano)
Vincent R. Giordano
Senior Vice President
(Edward J. Andrews)
Edward J. Andrews
Portfolio Manager
(Peter J. Hayes)
Peter J. Hayes
Portfolio Manager
(Helen M. Sheehan)
Helen M. Sheehan
Portfolio Manager
November 24, 1995
<PAGE>
We are pleased to announce that the following persons are
responsible for the day-to-day management of the Funds in Merrill
Lynch Multi-State Limited Maturity Municipal Series Trust:
Edward J. Andrews is Portfolio Manager for Merrill Lynch California
Limited Maturity Municipal Bond Fund, Merrill Lynch Florida Limited
Maturity Municipal Bond Fund, Merrill Lynch Michigan Limited
Maturity Municipal Bond Fund and Merrill Lynch New York Limited
Maturity Municipal Bond Fund. Mr. Andrews has been employed by
Merrill Asset Lynch Management, L.P. (an affiliate of the Funds'
investment adviser) since 1991 as Vice President and Portfolio
Manager. Prior to that he was employed by Citibank as an investment
officer from 1982 to 1991.
Peter J. Hayes is Portfolio Manager for Merrill Lynch Massachusetts
Limited Maturity Municipal Bond Fund. Mr. Hayes has served as Vice
President of Merrill Lynch Asset Management, L.P. (an affiliate of
the Fund's investment adviser) since 1989 and Assistant Vice
President from 1987 to 1989. Prior to that he was Assistant Vice
President of Shawmut Bank, N.A. from 1985 to 1987.
Helen M. Sheehan is Portfolio Manager for Merrill Lynch Arizona
Limited Maturity Municipal Bond Fund, Merrill Lynch New Jersey
Limited Maturity Municipal Bond Fund and Merrill Lynch Pennsylvania
Limited Maturity Municipal Bond Fund. Ms. Sheehan has been employed
by Merrill Lynch Asset Management, L.P. (an affiliate of the Funds'
investment advis-er) since 1985 and as Vice President and Portfolio
Manager in the Tax-Exempt Bond Department since 1991.
PERFORMANCE DATA
About Fund
Performance
Since October 21, 1994, investors have been able to purchase shares
of the Fund through the Merrill Lynch Select Pricing SM System,
which offers four pricing alternatives:
<PAGE>
* Class A Shares incur a maximum initial sales charge (front-end
load) of 1% and bear no ongoing distribution or account maintenance
fees. Class A Shares are available only to eligible investors.
* Class B Shares are subject to a maximum contingent deferred sales
charge of 1% if redeemed during the first year, decreasing 1% the
next year to 0%. In addition, Class B Shares are subject to a
distribution fee of 0.20% and an account maintenance fee of 0.15%.
These shares automatically convert to Class D Shares after
approximately 10 years.
* Class C Shares are subject to a distribution fee of 0.20% and an
account maintenance fee of 0.15%. In addition, Class C Shares are
subject to a 1% contingent deferred sales charge if redeemed within
one year of purchase.
* Class D Shares incur a maximum initial sales charge of 1% and an
account maintenance fee of 0.10% (but no distribution fee).
Performance data for all of the Fund's shares are presented in the
"Recent Performance Results" table on pages 10 and 11. Data for the
Fund's Class A and Class B Shares are presented in the "Average
Annual Total Returns" tables on pages 8 and 9. Data for Class C and
Class D Shares are also presented in the "Aggregate Total Returns"
tables on pages 9 and 10.
The "Recent Performance Results" table shows investment results
before the deduction of any sales charges for all of the Fund's
shares for the 12-month and 3-month periods ended October 31, 1995.
All data in this table assume imposition of the actual total
expenses incurred (net of reimbursement) by each class of shares
during the relevant period.
None of the past results shown should be considered a representation
of future performance. Investment return and principal value of
shares will fluctuate so that shares, when redeemed, may be worth
more or less than their original cost. Dividends paid to each class
of shares will vary because of the different levels of account
maintenance, distribution and transfer agency fees applicable to
each class, which are deducted from the income available to be paid
to shareholders.
PERFORMANCE DATA (continued)
<PAGE>
Average Annual
Total Returns
Arizona Limited Maturity
% Return Without % Return With
Class A Shares* Sales Charge Sales Charge**
Year Ended 9/30/95 +7.04% +5.97%
Inception (11/26/93) through 9/30/95 +4.99 +4.42
California Limited Maturity
% Return Without % Return With
Class A Shares* Sales Charge Sales Charge**
Year Ended 9/30/95 +6.98% +5.91%
Inception (11/26/93) through 9/30/95 +4.42 +3.86
Florida Limited Maturity
% Return Without % Return With
Class A Shares* Sales Charge Sales Charge**
Year Ended 9/30/95 +6.80% +5.73%
Inception (11/26/93) through 9/30/95 +4.33 +3.77
Massachusetts Limited Maturity
% Return Without % Return With
Class A Shares* Sales Charge Sales Charge**
Year Ended 9/30/95 +5.91% +4.85%
Inception (11/26/93) through 9/30/95 +4.30 +3.74
Michigan Limited Maturity
% Return Without % Return With
Class A Shares* Sales Charge Sales Charge**
Year Ended 9/30/95 +6.22% +5.16%
Inception (11/26/93) through 9/30/95 +4.15 +3.58
<PAGE>
New Jersey Limited Maturity
% Return Without % Return With
Class A Shares* Sales Charge Sales Charge**
Year Ended 9/30/95 +7.30% +6.23%
Inception (11/26/93) through 9/30/95 +4.98 +4.41
New York Limited Maturity
% Return Without % Return With
Class A Shares* Sales Charge Sales Charge**
Year Ended 9/30/95 +7.36% +6.28%
Inception (11/26/93) through 9/30/95 +4.78 +4.21
Pennsylvania Limited Maturity
% Return Without % Return With
Class A Shares* Sales Charge Sales Charge**
Year Ended 9/30/95 +7.33% +6.26%
Inception (11/26/93) through 9/30/95 +4.87 +4.30
[FN]
*Maximum sales charge is 1%.
**Assuming maximum sales charge.
Arizona Limited Maturity
% Return % Return
Class B Shares* Without CDSC With CDSC**
Year Ended 9/30/95 +6.66% +5.66%
Inception (11/26/93) through 9/30/95 +4.62 +4.62
California Limited Maturity
<PAGE>
% Return % Return
Class B Shares* Without CDSC With CDSC**
Year Ended 9/30/95 +6.50% +5.50%
Inception (11/26/93) through 9/30/95 +4.00 +4.00
Florida Limited Maturity
% Return % Return
Class B Shares* Without CDSC With CDSC**
Year Ended 9/30/95 +6.42% +5.42%
Inception (11/26/93) through 9/30/95 +3.97 +3.97
Massachusetts Limited Maturity
% Return % Return
Class B Shares* Without CDSC With CDSC**
Year Ended 9/30/95 +5.53% +4.53%
Inception (11/26/93) through 9/30/95 +3.93 +3.93
Michigan Limited Maturity
% Return % Return
Class B Shares* Without CDSC With CDSC**
Year Ended 9/30/95 +5.84% +4.84%
Inception (11/26/93) through 9/30/95 +3.77 +3.77
New Jersey Limited Maturity
% Return % Return
Class B Shares* Without CDSC With CDSC**
Year Ended 9/30/95 +6.92% +5.92%
Inception (11/26/93) through 9/30/95 +4.61 +4.61
New York Limited Maturity
<PAGE>
% Return % Return
Class B Shares* Without CDSC With CDSC**
Year Ended 9/30/95 +7.08% +6.08%
Inception (11/26/93) through 9/30/95 +4.47 +4.47
Pennsylvania Limited Maturity
% Return % Return
Class B Shares* Without CDSC With CDSC**
Year Ended 9/30/95 +6.95% +5.95%
Inception (11/26/93) through 9/30/95 +4.50 +4.50
[FN]
*Maximum contingent deferred sales charge is 1% and reduced to 0%
after 1 year.
**Assuming payment of applicable contingent deferred sales charge.
Aggregate
Total Returns
Arizona Limited Maturity
% Return % Return
Class C Shares* Without CDSC With CDSC**
Inception (10/21/94) through 9/30/95 +6.69% +5.69%
California Limited Maturity
% Return % Return
Class C Shares* Without CDSC With CDSC**
Inception (10/21/94) through 9/30/95 +6.96% +5.96%
<PAGE>
Florida Limited Maturity
% Return % Return
Class C Shares* Without CDSC With CDSC**
Inception (10/21/94) through 9/30/95 +6.55% +5.55%
Massachusetts Limited Maturity
% Return % Return
Class C Shares* Without CDSC With CDSC**
Inception (10/21/94) through 9/30/95 +6.03% +5.03%
Michigan Limited Maturity
% Return % Return
Class C Shares* Without CDSC With CDSC**
Inception (10/21/94) through 9/30/95 +6.20% +5.20%
New Jersey Limited Maturity
% Return % Return
Class C Shares* Without CDSC With CDSC**
Inception (10/21/94) through 9/30/95 -3.19% -4.13%
<PAGE>
Arizona Limited Maturity
% Return Without % Return With
Class D Shares* Sales Charge Sales Charge**
Inception (10/21/94) through 9/30/95 +7.18% +6.11%
California Limited Maturity
% Return Without % Return With
Class D Shares* Sales Charge Sales Charge**
Inception (10/21/94) through 9/30/95 +7.23% +6.16%
Florida Limited Maturity
% Return Without % Return With
Class D Shares* Sales Charge Sales Charge**
Inception (10/21/94) through 9/30/95 +7.04% +5.97%
Massachusetts Limited Maturity
% Return Without % Return With
Class D Shares* Sales Charge Sales Charge**
Inception (10/21/94) through 9/30/95 +6.13% +5.07%
Michigan Limited Maturity
% Return Without % Return With
Class D Shares* Sales Charge Sales Charge**
Inception (10/21/94) through 9/30/95 +6.68% +5.61%
<PAGE>
New Jersey Limited Maturity
% Return Without % Return With
Class D Shares* Sales Charge Sales Charge**
Inception (10/21/94) through 9/30/95 +7.46% +6.39%
PERFORMANCE DATA (concluded)
Aggregate
Total Returns
(concluded)
New York Limited Maturity
% Return % Return
Class C Shares* Without CDSC With CDSC**
Inception (10/21/94) through 9/30/95 +7.17% +6.17%
Pennsylvania Limited Maturity
% Return % Return
Class C Shares* Without CDSC With CDSC**
Inception (10/21/94) through 9/30/95 +6.92% +5.92%
[FN]
*Maximum contingent deferred sales charge is 1% and reduced to 0%
after 1 year.
**Assuming payment of applicable contingent deferred sales charge.
New York Limited Maturity
% Return Without % Return With
Class D Shares* Sales Charge Sales Charge**
Inception (10/21/94) through 9/30/95 +7.70% +6.63%
Pennsylvania Limited Maturity
% Return Without % Return With
Class D Shares* Sales Charge Sales Charge**
Inception (10/21/94) through 9/30/95 +7.38% +6.31%
[FN]
*Maximum sales charge is 1%.
**Assuming maximum sales charge.
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
Recent
Performance
Results*
<CAPTION>
Standardized
12 Month 3 Month 30-day Yield
12 Month 3 Month Total Total As of
10/31/95 7/31/95 10/31/94 % Change % Change Return Return 10/31/95
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Arizona Limited Maturity Class A Shares $10.20 $10.17 $9.85 +3.55% +0.29% +8.13%(1) +1.32%(2) 3.67%
Arizona Limited Maturity Class B Shares 10.20 10.16 9.85 +3.55 +0.39 +7.75(3) +1.33(4) 3.35
Arizona Limited Maturity Class C Shares 10.21 10.17 9.85 +3.65 +0.39 +7.62(5) +1.33(4) 3.37
Arizona Limited Maturity Class D Shares 10.21 10.17 9.85 +3.65 +0.39 +8.14(6) +1.39(7) 3.58
California Limited Maturity Class A Shares 10.09 9.99 9.71 +3.91 +1.00 +8.53(8) +2.04(2) 3.69
California Limited Maturity Class B Shares 10.09 9.99 9.71 +3.91 +1.00 +8.15(9) +1.95(4) 3.38
California Limited Maturity Class C Shares 10.09 9.99 9.72 +3.81 +1.00 +8.03(9) +2.00(10) 3.55
California Limited Maturity Class D Shares 10.09 9.99 9.71 +3.91 +1.00 +8.42(11) +2.02(7) 3.59
Florida Limited Maturity Class A Shares 10.07 10.02 9.73 +3.49 +0.50 +8.11(12) +1.55(13) 3.84
Florida Limited Maturity Class B Shares 10.07 10.02 9.73 +3.49 +0.50 +7.73(14) +1.47(15) 3.52
Florida Limited Maturity Class C Shares 10.07 10.01 9.72 +3.60 +0.60 +7.58(16) +1.53(17) 3.67
Florida Limited Maturity Class D Shares 10.07 10.01 9.72 +3.60 +0.60 +8.12(18) +1.63(19) 3.74
Massachusetts Limited Maturity Class A Shares 10.03 9.96 9.79 +2.58(20) +0.70 +7.20(21) +1.73(19) 3.93
Massachusetts Limited Maturity Class B Shares 10.03 9.96 9.79 +2.58(20) +0.70 +6.81(22) +1.64(23) 3.61
Massachusetts Limited Maturity Class C Shares 10.03 9.96 9.78 +2.69(20) +0.70 +7.09(24) +1.69(25) 3.81
Massachusetts Limited Maturity Class D Shares 10.03 9.96 9.78 +2.69(20) +0.70 +7.20(26) +1.71(10) 3.83
Michigan Limited Maturity Class A Shares 10.04 9.98 9.71 +3.40 +0.60 +8.07(27) +1.65(2) 3.80
Michigan Limited Maturity Class B Shares 10.04 9.98 9.71 +3.40 +0.60 +7.69(28) +1.55(4) 3.47
Michigan Limited Maturity Class C Shares 10.04 9.98 9.71 +3.40 +0.60 +7.47(29) +1.55(4) 3.47
Michigan Limited Maturity Class D Shares 10.03 9.97 9.71 +3.30 +0.60 +7.86(30) +1.62(7) 3.70
New Jersey Limited Maturity Class A Shares 10.21 10.15 9.83 +3.87 +0.59 +8.31(31) +1.63(32) 3.76
New Jersey Limited Maturity Class B Shares 10.21 10.16 9.84 +3.76 +0.49 +7.82(33) +1.44(34) 3.45
New Jersey Limited Maturity Class C Shares 9.25 9.20 9.84 -6.00 +0.54 -2.51(35) +1.47(36) 3.39
New Jersey Limited Maturity Class D Shares 10.21 10.16 9.83 +3.87 +0.49 +8.21(37) +1.50(19) 3.67
New York Limited Maturity Class A Shares 10.13 10.05 9.74 +4.00 +0.80 +8.81(38) +1.91(39) 4.14
New York Limited Maturity Class B Shares 10.13 10.05 9.74 +4.00 +0.80 +8.42(40) +1.82(19) 3.82
New York Limited Maturity Class C Shares 10.13 10.05 9.74 +4.00 +0.80 +8.27(3) +1.87(41) 4.01
New York Limited Maturity Class D Shares 10.14 10.05 9.74 +4.11 +0.90 +8.81(42) +1.99(43) 4.03
Pennsylvania Limited Maturity Class A Shares 10.19 10.10 9.81 +3.87 +0.89 +8.45(12) +1.95(44) 3.88
Pennsylvania Limited Maturity Class B Shares 10.19 10.10 9.81 +3.87 +0.89 +8.07(45) +1.86(46) 3.56
Pennsylvania Limited Maturity Class C Shares 10.19 10.10 9.81 +3.87 +0.89 +7.88(47) +1.89(48) 3.73
Pennsylvania Limited Maturity Class D Shares 10.19 10.10 9.81 +3.87 +0.89 +8.35(49) +1.93(32) 3.78
<FN>
*Investment results shown do not reflect sales charges; results
shown would be lower if a sales charge was included.
(1)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.435 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(2)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.103 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(3)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.400 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(4)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.094 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(5)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.378 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(6)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.426 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(7)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.101 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(8)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.430 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(9)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.395 per share
ordinary income dividends.
<PAGE>
(10)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.099 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(11)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.420 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(12)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.432 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(13)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.105 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(14)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.397 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(15)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.096 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(16)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.373 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(17)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.092 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(18)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.423 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(19)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.102 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(20)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.012 per share capital
gains distributions.
(21)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.436 per share
ordinary income dividends and $0.012 per share capital gains
distributions.
(22)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.400 per share
ordinary income dividends and $0.012 per share capital gains
distributions.
(23)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.093 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(24)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.416 per share
ordinary income dividends and $0.012 per share capital gains
distributions.
(25)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.098 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(26)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.426 per share
ordinary income dividends and $0.012 per share capital gains
distributions.
(27)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.437 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(28)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.401 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(29)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.381 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(30)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.427 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(31)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.421 per share
ordinary income dividends
(32)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.104 per share
ordinary income dividends.
<PAGE>
(33)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.385 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(34)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.095 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(35)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.339 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(36)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.084 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(37)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.412 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(38)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.449 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(39)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.111 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(40)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.414 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(41)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.107 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(42)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.440 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(43)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.109 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(44)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.106 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(45)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.396 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(46)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.097 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(47)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.379 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(48)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.100 per share
ordinary income dividends.
(49)Percent change includes reinvestment of $0.422 per share
ordinary income dividends.
</TABLE>
PORTFOLIO COMPOSITION
<PAGE>
Arizona
Limited Maturity
Municipal
Bond Fund
For the Quarter Ended October 31, 1995
Distribution by Market Sector*
General Obligations & Tax Revenue Bonds 50.0%
Other Revenue Bonds 44.0
Prerefunded Bonds** 6.0
------
Total 100.0%
======
Net assets as of October 31, 1995 were $6,271,268.
Quality Ratings*
(Based on Nationally Recognized Rating Services)
A pie chart showing the following percentages:
AAA/Aaa 38%
AA/Aa 33%
Other++ 29%
[FN]
*Based on total market value of the portfolio as of October 31,
1995.
**Backed by a fund holding US Treasury or other high-quality
securities.
++Temporary investments in short-term municipal securities.
California
Limited Maturity
Municipal
Bond Fund
<PAGE>
For the Quarter Ended October 31, 1995
Distribution by Market Sector*
Other Revenue Bonds 76.4%
General Obligations & Tax Revenue Bonds 10.1
Prerefunded Bonds** 8.8
Utility Revenue Bonds 4.7
------
Total 100.0%
======
Net assets as of October 31, 1995 were $15,899,697.
Quality Ratings*
(Based on Nationally Recognized Rating Services)
A pie chart showing the following percentages:
AAA/Aaa 35%
AA/Aa 18%
A/A 18%
Other++ 29%
[FN]
*Based on total market value of the portfolio as of October 31,
1995.
**Backed by a fund holding US Treasury or other high-quality
securities.
++Temporary investments in short-term municipal securities.
Florida
Limited Maturity
Municipal
Bond Fund
<PAGE>
For the Quarter Ended October 31, 1995
Distribution by Market Sector*
Other Revenue Bonds 48.8%
Prerefunded Bonds** 25.6
General Obligations & Tax Revenue Bonds 22.9
Utility Revenue Bonds 2.7
------
Total 100.0%
======
Net assets as of October 31, 1995 were $31,787,431.
Quality Ratings*
(Based on Nationally Recognized Rating Services)
A pie chart showing the following percentages:
AAA/Aaa 53%
AA/Aa 16%
A/A 5%
BBB/Baa 5%
Other++ 21%
[FN]
*Based on total market value of the portfolio as of October 31,
1995.
**Backed by a fund holding US Treasury or other high-quality
securities.
++Temporary investments in short-term municipal securities.
Massachusetts
Limited Maturity
Municipal
Bond Fund
<PAGE>
For the Quarter Ended October 31, 1995
Distribution by Market Sector*
Other Revenue Bonds 41.1%
General Obligations & Tax Revenue Bonds 29.4
Utility Revenue Bonds 15.6
Prerefunded Bonds** 13.9
------
Total 100.0%
======
Net assets as of October 31, 1995 were $9,754,615.
Quality Ratings*
(Based on Nationally Recognized Rating Services)
A pie chart showing the following percentages:
AAA/Aaa 44%
AA/Aa 33%
BBB/Baa 4%
Other++ 13%
NR++++ 6%
[FN]
*Based on total market value of the portfolio as of October 31,
1995.
**Backed by a fund holding US Treasury or other high-quality
securities.
++Temporary investments in short-term municipal securities.
++++Not Rated.
PORTFOLIO COMPOSITION (concluded)
Michigan
Limited Maturity
Municipal
Bond Fund
<PAGE>
For the Quarter Ended October 31, 1995
Distribution by Market Sector*
Other Revenue Bonds 57.9%
General Obligations & Tax Revenue Bonds 27.3
Prerefunded Bonds* * 9.1
Utility Revenue Bonds 5.7
------
Total 100.0%
======
Net assets as of October 31, 1995 were $5,045,177.
Quality Ratings*
(Based on Nationally Recognized Rating Services)
A pie chart showing the following percentages:
AAA/Aaa 32%
AA/Aa 40%
A/A 6%
Other++ 22%
[FN]
*Based on total market value of the portfolio as of October 31,
1995.
**Backed by a fund holding US Treasury or other high-quality
securities.
++Temporary investments in short-term municipal securities.
New Jersey
Limited Maturity
Municipal
Bond Fund
<PAGE>
For the Quarter Ended October 31, 1995
Distribution by Market Sector*
Other Revenue Bonds 51.0%
General Obligations & Tax Revenue Bonds 49.0
------
Total 100.0%
======
Net assets as of October 31, 1995 were $9,998,871.
Quality Ratings*
(Based on Nationally Recognized Rating Services)
A pie chart showing the following percentages:
AAA/Aaa 46%
AA/Aa 28%
A/A 4%
Other++ 22%
[FN]
*Based on total market value of the portfolio as of October 31,
1995.
++Temporary investments in short-term municipal securities.
New York
Limited Maturity
Municipal
Bond Fund
For the Quarter Ended October 31, 1995
Distribution by Market Sector*
Other Revenue Bonds 57.1%
General Obligations & Tax Revenue Bonds 33.9
Prerefunded Bonds** 9.0
------
Total 100.0%
======
<PAGE>
Net assets as of October 31, 1995 were $16,106,761.
Quality Ratings*
(Based on Nationally Recognized Rating Services)
A pie chart showing the following percentages:
AAA/Aaa 35%
AA/Aa 27%
A/A 12%
BBB/Baa 4%
Other++ 22%
[FN]
*Based on total market value of the portfolio as of October 31,
1995.
**Backed by a fund holding US Treasury or other high-quality
securities.
++Temporary investments in short-term municipal securities.
Pennsylvania
Limited Maturity
Municipal
Bond Fund
For the Quarter Ended October 31, 1995
Distribution by Market Sector*
General Obligations & Tax Revenue Bonds 38.9%
Other Revenue Bonds 38.3
Prerefunded Bonds** 17.6
Utility Revenue Bonds 5.2
------
Total 100.0%
======
<PAGE>
Net assets as of October 31, 1995 were $8,449,378.
Quality Ratings*
(Based on Nationally Recognized Rating Services)
A pie chart showing the following percentages:
AAA/Aaa 33%
AA/Aa 20%
A/A 19%
Other++ 28%
[FN]
*Based on total market value of the portfolio as of October 31,
1995.
**Backed by a fund holding US Treasury or other high-quality
securities.
++Temporary investments in short-term municipal securities.
