Skip to main content
PensionRisk

California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS) vs Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF)

Side-by-side pension health comparison from DOL and public plan data

California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS) and Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) are meaningfully apart on the LakeQuality pension-health rubric: California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS) grades C while Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) grades A. Funding ratios: 67% vs 81%.

Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) comes out ahead on the composite rubric. For a participant in either plan, the spread is informative but not directly actionable — pension participation is not portable, so the relevant question is what each plan's funded-status trajectory means for that participant's benefit security.

Verdict

Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 80/100 (A) compared to California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS) at 58/100 (C). Funding ratios differ by 13.9 percentage points (81.2% vs 67.3%). Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) covers 438,000 participants.

MetricCalifornia Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS)Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF)
Health Score
Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk
58/100 (C)80/100 (A)*
Funding Ratio
Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded)
67.3%81.2%*
Total Assets$473.0B$51.2B
Total Liabilities$703.0B$63.1B*
Unfunded Liability$230.0B$11.9B*
Participants2,050,000438,000
1-Year Investment Return5.8%5.8%
Plan Typepublicpublic
PBGC Risk Levelmoderatelow
SponsorState of CaliforniaState of Illinois

Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 80/100 (A) compared to California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS) at 58/100 (C). Funding ratios differ by 13.9 percentage points (81.2% vs 67.3%). Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) covers 438,000 participants.

Explore More