Florida Retirement System (FRS) vs North Carolina Retirement Systems
Side-by-side pension health comparison from DOL and public plan data
Verdict
North Carolina Retirement Systems has a stronger Pension Health Score of 82/100 (A) compared to Florida Retirement System (FRS) at 76/100 (B). Funding ratios differ by 4.9 percentage points (87.1% vs 82.2%). North Carolina Retirement Systems covers 960,000 participants.
| Metric | Florida Retirement System (FRS) | North Carolina Retirement Systems |
|---|---|---|
| Health Score Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk | 76/100 (B) | 82/100 (A)* |
| Funding Ratio Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded) | 82.2% | 87.1%* |
| Total Assets | $190.0B | $112.0B |
| Total Liabilities | $231.1B | $128.6B* |
| Unfunded Liability | $41.1B | $16.6B* |
| Participants | 1,065,000 | 960,000 |
| 1-Year Investment Return | 6.5% | 6.6%* |
| Plan Type | public | public |
| PBGC Risk Level | low | low |
| Sponsor | State of Florida | State of North Carolina |
North Carolina Retirement Systems has a stronger Pension Health Score of 82/100 (A) compared to Florida Retirement System (FRS) at 76/100 (B). Funding ratios differ by 4.9 percentage points (87.1% vs 82.2%). North Carolina Retirement Systems covers 960,000 participants.