Skip to main content
PensionRisk

Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) vs UPS Retirement Plan

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

Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) (A) and UPS Retirement Plan (A) are close on the PensionRisk rubric. Funding ratios sit at 81% and 91% 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.

Reviewed by PensionRisk Editorial Team · Updated

Verdict

UPS Retirement Plan has a stronger Pension Health Score of 95/100 (A) compared to Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) at 80/100 (A). Funding ratios differ by 9.5 percentage points (90.7% vs 81.2%). UPS Retirement Plan covers 243,932 participants.

MetricIllinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF)UPS Retirement Plan
Health Score
Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk
80/100 (A)95/100 (A)*
Funding Ratio
Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded)
81.2%90.7%*
Total Assets$51.2B$9.7B
Total Liabilities$63.1B$10.7B*
Unfunded Liability$11.9B$993.0M*
Participants438,000243,932
1-Year Investment Return5.8%6.7%*
Plan Typepubliccorporate
PBGC Risk Levellowlow
SponsorState of IllinoisUnited Parcel Service

UPS Retirement Plan has a stronger Pension Health Score of 95/100 (A) compared to Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) at 80/100 (A). Funding ratios differ by 9.5 percentage points (90.7% vs 81.2%). UPS Retirement Plan covers 243,932 participants.

Explore More

Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) full profile|UPS Retirement Plan full profile

Related Comparisons