National Electrical Benefit Fund (NEBF) vs Pennsylvania State Employees Retirement System (SERS)
Side-by-side pension health comparison from DOL and public plan data
Verdict
Pennsylvania State Employees Retirement System (SERS) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 57/100 (C) compared to National Electrical Benefit Fund (NEBF) at 52/100 (C). Funding ratios differ by 8.0 percentage points (63.1% vs 55.1%). Pennsylvania State Employees Retirement System (SERS) covers 245,000 participants.
| Metric | National Electrical Benefit Fund (NEBF) | Pennsylvania State Employees Retirement System (SERS) |
|---|---|---|
| Health Score Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk | 52/100 (C) | 57/100 (C)* |
| Funding Ratio Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded) | 55.1% | 63.1%* |
| Total Assets | $14.0B | $36.2B |
| Total Liabilities | $25.4B* | $57.4B |
| Unfunded Liability | $11.4B* | $21.2B |
| Participants | 595,000 | 245,000 |
| 1-Year Investment Return | 5.2% | 5.4%* |
| Plan Type | multiemployer | public |
| PBGC Risk Level | high | high |
| Sponsor | IBEW & NECA | State of Pennsylvania |
Pennsylvania State Employees Retirement System (SERS) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 57/100 (C) compared to National Electrical Benefit Fund (NEBF) at 52/100 (C). Funding ratios differ by 8.0 percentage points (63.1% vs 55.1%). Pennsylvania State Employees Retirement System (SERS) covers 245,000 participants.