California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS) vs Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF)
Side-by-side pension health comparison from DOL and public plan data
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.
| Metric | California 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* |
| Participants | 2,050,000 | 438,000 |
| 1-Year Investment Return | 5.8% | 5.8% |
| Plan Type | public | public |
| PBGC Risk Level | moderate | low |
| Sponsor | State of California | State 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.