Skip to main content
PensionRisk

Employees Retirement System of Texas (ERS) vs Pennsylvania State Employees Retirement System (SERS)

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

Employees Retirement System of Texas (ERS) (B) and Pennsylvania State Employees Retirement System (SERS) (C) are close on the LakeQuality rubric. Funding ratios sit at 70% and 63% 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

Employees Retirement System of Texas (ERS) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 66/100 (B) compared to Pennsylvania State Employees Retirement System (SERS) at 57/100 (C). Funding ratios differ by 7.0 percentage points (70.1% vs 63.1%). Employees Retirement System of Texas (ERS) covers 327,000 participants.

MetricEmployees Retirement System of Texas (ERS)Pennsylvania State Employees Retirement System (SERS)
Health Score
Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk
66/100 (B)*57/100 (C)
Funding Ratio
Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded)
70.1%*63.1%
Total Assets$31.5B$36.2B
Total Liabilities$44.9B*$57.4B
Unfunded Liability$13.4B*$21.2B
Participants327,000245,000
1-Year Investment Return5.5%*5.4%
Plan Typepublicpublic
PBGC Risk Levelmoderatehigh
SponsorState of TexasState of Pennsylvania

Employees Retirement System of Texas (ERS) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 66/100 (B) compared to Pennsylvania State Employees Retirement System (SERS) at 57/100 (C). Funding ratios differ by 7.0 percentage points (70.1% vs 63.1%). Employees Retirement System of Texas (ERS) covers 327,000 participants.

Explore More