Skip to main content
PensionRisk

New Jersey Police & Firemen's Retirement System (PFRS) vs Johnson & Johnson Pension Plan

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

New Jersey Police & Firemen's Retirement System (PFRS) and Johnson & Johnson Pension Plan are meaningfully apart on the LakeQuality pension-health rubric: New Jersey Police & Firemen's Retirement System (PFRS) grades C while Johnson & Johnson Pension Plan grades A. Funding ratios: 58% vs 124%.

Johnson & Johnson Pension Plan comes out ahead on the composite rubric. For a participant in either plan, the spread is informative but not directly actionable — pension participation is not portable, so the relevant question is what each plan's funded-status trajectory means for that participant's benefit security.

Verdict

Johnson & Johnson Pension Plan has a stronger Pension Health Score of 100/100 (A) compared to New Jersey Police & Firemen's Retirement System (PFRS) at 55/100 (C). Funding ratios differ by 65.9 percentage points (124.0% vs 58.1%). Johnson & Johnson Pension Plan covers 83,076 participants.

MetricNew Jersey Police & Firemen's Retirement System (PFRS)Johnson & Johnson Pension Plan
Health Score
Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk
55/100 (C)100/100 (A)*
Funding Ratio
Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded)
58.1%124.0%*
Total Assets$30.0B$21.1B
Total Liabilities$51.6B$17.0B*
Unfunded Liability$21.6B$0*
Participants88,00083,076
1-Year Investment Return5.3%7.5%*
Plan Typepubliccorporate
PBGC Risk Levelhighlow
SponsorState of New JerseyJohnson & Johnson

Johnson & Johnson Pension Plan has a stronger Pension Health Score of 100/100 (A) compared to New Jersey Police & Firemen's Retirement System (PFRS) at 55/100 (C). Funding ratios differ by 65.9 percentage points (124.0% vs 58.1%). Johnson & Johnson Pension Plan covers 83,076 participants.

Explore More

Related Comparisons