Colorado Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) vs Pennsylvania State Employees Retirement System (SERS)
Side-by-side pension health comparison from DOL and public plan data
Verdict
Colorado Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 61/100 (C) compared to Pennsylvania State Employees Retirement System (SERS) at 57/100 (C). Funding ratios differ by 1.7 percentage points (64.8% vs 63.1%). Colorado Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) covers 625,000 participants.
| Metric | Colorado Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) | Pennsylvania State Employees Retirement System (SERS) |
|---|---|---|
| Health Score Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk | 61/100 (C)* | 57/100 (C) |
| Funding Ratio Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded) | 64.8%* | 63.1% |
| Total Assets | $58.0B | $36.2B |
| Total Liabilities | $89.5B | $57.4B* |
| Unfunded Liability | $31.5B | $21.2B* |
| Participants | 625,000 | 245,000 |
| 1-Year Investment Return | 5.5%* | 5.4% |
| Plan Type | public | public |
| PBGC Risk Level | high | high |
| Sponsor | State of Colorado | State of Pennsylvania |
Colorado Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 61/100 (C) compared to Pennsylvania State Employees Retirement System (SERS) at 57/100 (C). Funding ratios differ by 1.7 percentage points (64.8% vs 63.1%). Colorado Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) covers 625,000 participants.