Glucocorticoids (GCs) are often interpreted as indicators of disturbance, habitat quality, and fi tness in wild populations. However, since most investigations have been unable to examine habitat variability, GC levels, and fi tness simultaneously, such interpretations remain largely unvalidated. We combined a quantifi cation of two habitat types, a manipulation of foraging ability (feather-clipping just prior to nestling rearing), multiple baseline plasma GC measures, and multi-year reproductive monitoring to experimentally examine the linkages between habitat quality, GCs, and fi tness in female tree swallows Tachycineta bicolor . Control females experiencing the higher early-season food resources of inland -pasture habitat laid larger clutches, but fl edged an equal number but lower mass off spring compared to those in riparian -cropland habitat. Despite these diff erences in reproductive success, females nesting in the two habitat types did not diff er in baseline GC levels at the early-or late-breeding stage. Feather-clipping reduced provisioning rate in both habitat types. However, baseline GC levels were aff ected in a habitat-specifi c way; only individuals in inland-pasture habitats showed an increase in GCs. Despite this diff erence in GC levels, the manipulation did not infl uence off spring mass, reproductive output, adult return rate (a proxy for survival) to the following year, or reproductive success in the subsequent year. Nonetheless, regardless of treatment, individuals with higher GC levels during the late breeding stage returned in the following year with higher GC levels at incubation, indicating a long-term eff ect on future GC levels. Our results indicate that environmental changes (e.g. foraging conditions) can have consequences for body condition, behaviour, and current and future baseline GC levels without concomitant infl uences on fi tness, and that diff erences in fi tness components between habitats may not be refl ected in baseline GC levels. Th ese results illustrate that baseline GCs may not simultaneously refl ect environmental quality and fi tness, potentially limiting their application in ecological and conservation settings.