Minnesota Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) vs Boeing Company Employee Retirement Plan
Side-by-side pension health comparison from DOL and public plan data
Verdict
Minnesota Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 71/100 (B) compared to Boeing Company Employee Retirement Plan at 70/100 (B). Funding ratios differ by 1.0 percentage points (79.1% vs 78.1%). Minnesota Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) covers 378,000 participants.
| Metric | Minnesota Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) | Boeing Company Employee Retirement Plan |
|---|---|---|
| Health Score Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk | 71/100 (B)* | 70/100 (B) |
| Funding Ratio Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded) | 79.1%* | 78.1% |
| Total Assets | $35.0B | $56.0B |
| Total Liabilities | $44.2B* | $71.7B |
| Unfunded Liability | $9.2B* | $15.7B |
| Participants | 378,000 | 228,000 |
| 1-Year Investment Return | 5.9% | 6.7%* |
| Plan Type | public | corporate |
| PBGC Risk Level | moderate | moderate |
| Sponsor | State of Minnesota | Boeing Company |
Minnesota Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 71/100 (B) compared to Boeing Company Employee Retirement Plan at 70/100 (B). Funding ratios differ by 1.0 percentage points (79.1% vs 78.1%). Minnesota Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) covers 378,000 participants.