Skip to main content
PensionRisk

Florida Retirement System (FRS) vs Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF)

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

Florida Retirement System (FRS) (B) and Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) (A) are close on the LakeQuality rubric. Funding ratios sit at 82% and 81% 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

Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 80/100 (A) compared to Florida Retirement System (FRS) at 76/100 (B). Funding ratios differ by 1.0 percentage points (81.2% vs 82.2%). Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) covers 438,000 participants.

MetricFlorida Retirement System (FRS)Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF)
Health Score
Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk
76/100 (B)80/100 (A)*
Funding Ratio
Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded)
82.2%*81.2%
Total Assets$190.0B$51.2B
Total Liabilities$231.1B$63.1B*
Unfunded Liability$41.1B$11.9B*
Participants1,065,000438,000
1-Year Investment Return6.5%*5.8%
Plan Typepublicpublic
PBGC Risk Levellowlow
SponsorState of FloridaState of Illinois

Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 80/100 (A) compared to Florida Retirement System (FRS) at 76/100 (B). Funding ratios differ by 1.0 percentage points (81.2% vs 82.2%). Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) covers 438,000 participants.

Explore More