Minnesota Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) vs NYC Teachers Retirement System (TRS)
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 NYC Teachers Retirement System (TRS) at 68/100 (B). Funding ratios differ by 4.9 percentage points (79.1% vs 74.2%). Minnesota Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) covers 378,000 participants.
| Metric | Minnesota Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) | NYC Teachers Retirement System (TRS) |
|---|---|---|
| Health Score Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk | 71/100 (B)* | 68/100 (B) |
| Funding Ratio Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded) | 79.1%* | 74.2% |
| Total Assets | $35.0B | $92.0B |
| Total Liabilities | $44.2B* | $124.0B |
| Unfunded Liability | $9.2B* | $32.0B |
| Participants | 378,000 | 225,000 |
| 1-Year Investment Return | 5.9%* | 5.4% |
| Plan Type | public | public |
| PBGC Risk Level | moderate | moderate |
| Sponsor | State of Minnesota | New York City |
Minnesota Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 71/100 (B) compared to NYC Teachers Retirement System (TRS) at 68/100 (B). Funding ratios differ by 4.9 percentage points (79.1% vs 74.2%). Minnesota Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) covers 378,000 participants.