Florida Retirement System (FRS) vs New Jersey Public Employees Retirement System (PERS)
Side-by-side pension health comparison from DOL and public plan data
Verdict
Florida Retirement System (FRS) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 76/100 (B) compared to New Jersey Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) at 54/100 (C). Funding ratios differ by 29.9 percentage points (82.2% vs 52.3%). Florida Retirement System (FRS) covers 1,065,000 participants.
| Metric | Florida Retirement System (FRS) | New Jersey Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) |
|---|---|---|
| Health Score Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk | 76/100 (B)* | 54/100 (C) |
| Funding Ratio Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded) | 82.2%* | 52.3% |
| Total Assets | $190.0B | $34.0B |
| Total Liabilities | $231.1B | $65.0B* |
| Unfunded Liability | $41.1B | $31.0B* |
| Participants | 1,065,000 | 425,000 |
| 1-Year Investment Return | 6.5%* | 5.1% |
| Plan Type | public | public |
| PBGC Risk Level | low | high |
| Sponsor | State of Florida | State of New Jersey |
Florida Retirement System (FRS) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 76/100 (B) compared to New Jersey Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) at 54/100 (C). Funding ratios differ by 29.9 percentage points (82.2% vs 52.3%). Florida Retirement System (FRS) covers 1,065,000 participants.