Central States, Southeast & Southwest Areas Pension Fund vs Mississippi Public Employees Retirement System (PERS)
Side-by-side pension health comparison from DOL and public plan data
Verdict
Mississippi Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 54/100 (C) compared to Central States, Southeast & Southwest Areas Pension Fund at 29/100 (F). Funding ratios differ by 38.1 percentage points (60.1% vs 22.0%). Mississippi Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) covers 322,000 participants.
| Metric | Central States, Southeast & Southwest Areas Pension Fund | Mississippi Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) |
|---|---|---|
| Health Score Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk | 29/100 (F) | 54/100 (C)* |
| Funding Ratio Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded) | 22.0% | 60.1%* |
| Total Assets | $9.5B | $29.0B |
| Total Liabilities | $43.2B* | $48.3B |
| Unfunded Liability | $33.7B | $19.3B* |
| Participants | 380,000 | 322,000 |
| 1-Year Investment Return | 4.5% | 5.3%* |
| Plan Type | multiemployer | public |
| PBGC Risk Level | critical | high |
| Sponsor | Teamsters Central States | State of Mississippi |
Mississippi Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 54/100 (C) compared to Central States, Southeast & Southwest Areas Pension Fund at 29/100 (F). Funding ratios differ by 38.1 percentage points (60.1% vs 22.0%). Mississippi Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) covers 322,000 participants.