Indiana Public Retirement System (INPRS) vs Mississippi Public Employees Retirement System (PERS)
Side-by-side pension health comparison from DOL and public plan data
Verdict
Indiana Public Retirement System (INPRS) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 70/100 (B) compared to Mississippi Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) at 54/100 (C). Funding ratios differ by 18.1 percentage points (78.2% vs 60.1%). Indiana Public Retirement System (INPRS) covers 425,000 participants.
| Metric | Indiana Public Retirement System (INPRS) | Mississippi Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) |
|---|---|---|
| Health Score Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk | 70/100 (B)* | 54/100 (C) |
| Funding Ratio Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded) | 78.2%* | 60.1% |
| Total Assets | $37.0B | $29.0B |
| Total Liabilities | $47.3B* | $48.3B |
| Unfunded Liability | $10.3B* | $19.3B |
| Participants | 425,000 | 322,000 |
| 1-Year Investment Return | 6.1%* | 5.3% |
| Plan Type | public | public |
| PBGC Risk Level | moderate | high |
| Sponsor | State of Indiana | State of Mississippi |
Indiana Public Retirement System (INPRS) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 70/100 (B) compared to Mississippi Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) at 54/100 (C). Funding ratios differ by 18.1 percentage points (78.2% vs 60.1%). Indiana Public Retirement System (INPRS) covers 425,000 participants.