Skip to main content
PensionRisk

Indiana Public Retirement System (INPRS) vs Mississippi Public Employees Retirement System (PERS)

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

Indiana Public Retirement System (INPRS) (B) and Mississippi Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) (C) are close on the LakeQuality rubric. Funding ratios sit at 78% and 60% 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

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.

MetricIndiana 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
Participants425,000322,000
1-Year Investment Return6.1%*5.3%
Plan Typepublicpublic
PBGC Risk Levelmoderatehigh
SponsorState of IndianaState 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.

Explore More