Skip to main content
PensionRisk

Florida Retirement System (FRS) vs Colorado Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA)

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

Florida Retirement System (FRS) (B) and Colorado Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) (C) are close on the LakeQuality rubric. Funding ratios sit at 82% and 65% 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

Florida Retirement System (FRS) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 76/100 (B) compared to Colorado Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) at 61/100 (C). Funding ratios differ by 17.4 percentage points (82.2% vs 64.8%). Florida Retirement System (FRS) covers 1,065,000 participants.

MetricFlorida Retirement System (FRS)Colorado Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA)
Health Score
Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk
76/100 (B)*61/100 (C)
Funding Ratio
Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded)
82.2%*64.8%
Total Assets$190.0B$58.0B
Total Liabilities$231.1B$89.5B*
Unfunded Liability$41.1B$31.5B*
Participants1,065,000625,000
1-Year Investment Return6.5%*5.5%
Plan Typepublicpublic
PBGC Risk Levellowhigh
SponsorState of FloridaState of Colorado

Florida Retirement System (FRS) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 76/100 (B) compared to Colorado Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) at 61/100 (C). Funding ratios differ by 17.4 percentage points (82.2% vs 64.8%). Florida Retirement System (FRS) covers 1,065,000 participants.

Explore More