Skip to main content
PensionRisk

Central States, Southeast & Southwest Areas Pension Fund vs Laborers National (Industrial) Pension Fund

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

Central States, Southeast & Southwest Areas Pension Fund (A) and Laborers National (Industrial) Pension Fund (A) are close on the LakeQuality rubric. Funding ratios sit at 94% and 99% respectively — within a few points of each other.

With grades this close, the comparison turns on plan-specific factors: status (active vs frozen), participant maturity, sponsor financial health, and multi-year trajectory rather than the headline composite.

Verdict

Laborers National (Industrial) Pension Fund has a stronger Pension Health Score of 99/100 (A) compared to Central States, Southeast & Southwest Areas Pension Fund at 97/100 (A). Funding ratios differ by 4.5 percentage points (98.6% vs 94.1%). Laborers National (Industrial) Pension Fund covers 44,923 participants.

MetricCentral States, Southeast & Southwest Areas Pension FundLaborers National (Industrial) Pension Fund
Health Score
Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk
97/100 (A)99/100 (A)*
Funding Ratio
Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded)
94.1%98.6%*
Total Assets$55.6B$4.9B
Total Liabilities$59.1B$5.0B*
Unfunded Liability$3.5B$71.8M*
Participants634,86144,923
1-Year Investment Return4.5%5.3%*
Plan Typemultiemployermultiemployer
PBGC Risk Levellowlow
SponsorTeamsters Central StatesLIUNA

Laborers National (Industrial) Pension Fund has a stronger Pension Health Score of 99/100 (A) compared to Central States, Southeast & Southwest Areas Pension Fund at 97/100 (A). Funding ratios differ by 4.5 percentage points (98.6% vs 94.1%). Laborers National (Industrial) Pension Fund covers 44,923 participants.

Explore More

Related Comparisons