Skip to main content
PensionRisk

Los Angeles City Employees Retirement System (LACERS) vs Orange County Employees Retirement System (OCERS)

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

Los Angeles City Employees Retirement System (LACERS) (B) and Orange County Employees Retirement System (OCERS) (B) are close on the LakeQuality rubric. Funding ratios sit at 76% and 76% 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

Orange County Employees Retirement System (OCERS) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 71/100 (B) compared to Los Angeles City Employees Retirement System (LACERS) at 70/100 (B). Funding ratios differ by 0.4 percentage points (76.2% vs 75.8%). Orange County Employees Retirement System (OCERS) covers 46,000 participants.

MetricLos Angeles City Employees Retirement System (LACERS)Orange County Employees Retirement System (OCERS)
Health Score
Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk
70/100 (B)71/100 (B)*
Funding Ratio
Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded)
75.8%76.2%*
Total Assets$20.1B$20.4B
Total Liabilities$26.5B*$26.8B
Unfunded Liability$6.4B$6.4B
Participants49,00046,000
1-Year Investment Return5.9%*5.5%
Plan Typepublicpublic
PBGC Risk Levelmoderatemoderate
SponsorCity of Los AngelesOrange County

Orange County Employees Retirement System (OCERS) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 71/100 (B) compared to Los Angeles City Employees Retirement System (LACERS) at 70/100 (B). Funding ratios differ by 0.4 percentage points (76.2% vs 75.8%). Orange County Employees Retirement System (OCERS) covers 46,000 participants.

Explore More

Related Comparisons