Skip to main content
PensionRisk

Los Angeles City Employees Retirement System (LACERS) vs Los Angeles Fire & Police Pensions (LAFPP)

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

Los Angeles City Employees Retirement System (LACERS) (B) and Los Angeles Fire & Police Pensions (LAFPP) (A) are close on the LakeQuality rubric. Funding ratios sit at 76% and 90% 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

Los Angeles Fire & Police Pensions (LAFPP) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 84/100 (A) compared to Los Angeles City Employees Retirement System (LACERS) at 70/100 (B). Funding ratios differ by 13.7 percentage points (89.5% vs 75.8%). Los Angeles Fire & Police Pensions (LAFPP) covers 27,500 participants.

MetricLos Angeles City Employees Retirement System (LACERS)Los Angeles Fire & Police Pensions (LAFPP)
Health Score
Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk
70/100 (B)84/100 (A)*
Funding Ratio
Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded)
75.8%89.5%*
Total Assets$20.1B$31.2B
Total Liabilities$26.5B*$34.9B
Unfunded Liability$6.4B$3.7B*
Participants49,00027,500
1-Year Investment Return5.9%6.5%*
Plan Typepublicpublic
PBGC Risk Levelmoderatelow
SponsorCity of Los AngelesCity of Los Angeles

Los Angeles Fire & Police Pensions (LAFPP) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 84/100 (A) compared to Los Angeles City Employees Retirement System (LACERS) at 70/100 (B). Funding ratios differ by 13.7 percentage points (89.5% vs 75.8%). Los Angeles Fire & Police Pensions (LAFPP) covers 27,500 participants.

Explore More

Related Comparisons