Iowa Public Employees Retirement System (IPERS) vs Employees Retirement System of Texas (ERS)
Side-by-side pension health comparison from DOL and public plan data
Verdict
Iowa Public Employees Retirement System (IPERS) 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 14.7 percentage points (84.8% vs 70.1%). Iowa Public Employees Retirement System (IPERS) covers 372,000 participants.
| Metric | Iowa Public Employees Retirement System (IPERS) | 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) | 84.8%* | 70.1% |
| Total Assets | $35.5B | $31.5B |
| Total Liabilities | $41.9B* | $44.9B |
| Unfunded Liability | $6.4B* | $13.4B |
| Participants | 372,000 | 327,000 |
| 1-Year Investment Return | 6.4%* | 5.5% |
| Plan Type | public | public |
| PBGC Risk Level | low | moderate |
| Sponsor | State of Iowa | State of Texas |
Iowa Public Employees Retirement System (IPERS) 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 14.7 percentage points (84.8% vs 70.1%). Iowa Public Employees Retirement System (IPERS) covers 372,000 participants.