Skip to main content
PensionRisk

Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) vs University of California Retirement Plan

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

Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) (A) and University of California Retirement Plan (B) are close on the LakeQuality rubric. Funding ratios sit at 81% and 84% 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 University of California Retirement Plan at 78/100 (B). Funding ratios differ by 2.3 percentage points (81.2% vs 83.5%). Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) covers 438,000 participants.

MetricIllinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF)University of California Retirement Plan
Health Score
Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk
80/100 (A)*78/100 (B)
Funding Ratio
Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded)
81.2%83.5%*
Total Assets$51.2B$82.0B
Total Liabilities$63.1B*$98.2B
Unfunded Liability$11.9B*$16.2B
Participants438,000305,000
1-Year Investment Return5.8%7.2%*
Plan Typepublicpublic
PBGC Risk Levellowlow
SponsorState of IllinoisUniversity of California

Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 80/100 (A) compared to University of California Retirement Plan at 78/100 (B). Funding ratios differ by 2.3 percentage points (81.2% vs 83.5%). Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) covers 438,000 participants.

Explore More