Skip to main content
PensionRisk

Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) vs Employees Retirement System of Texas (ERS)

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

Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) (A) and Employees Retirement System of Texas (ERS) (B) are close on the LakeQuality rubric. Funding ratios sit at 81% and 70% 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 Employees Retirement System of Texas (ERS) at 66/100 (B). Funding ratios differ by 11.1 percentage points (81.2% vs 70.1%). Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) covers 438,000 participants.

MetricIllinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF)Employees Retirement System of Texas (ERS)
Health Score
Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk
80/100 (A)*66/100 (B)
Funding Ratio
Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded)
81.2%*70.1%
Total Assets$51.2B$31.5B
Total Liabilities$63.1B$44.9B*
Unfunded Liability$11.9B*$13.4B
Participants438,000327,000
1-Year Investment Return5.8%*5.5%
Plan Typepublicpublic
PBGC Risk Levellowmoderate
SponsorState of IllinoisState of Texas

Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 80/100 (A) compared to Employees Retirement System of Texas (ERS) at 66/100 (B). Funding ratios differ by 11.1 percentage points (81.2% vs 70.1%). Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) covers 438,000 participants.

Explore More