New Jersey Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) vs UPS Retirement Plan
Side-by-side pension health comparison from DOL and public plan data
New Jersey Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) and UPS Retirement Plan are meaningfully apart on the LakeQuality pension-health rubric: New Jersey Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) grades C while UPS Retirement Plan grades A. Funding ratios: 52% vs 91%.
UPS Retirement 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
UPS Retirement Plan has a stronger Pension Health Score of 95/100 (A) compared to New Jersey Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) at 54/100 (C). Funding ratios differ by 38.4 percentage points (90.7% vs 52.3%). UPS Retirement Plan covers 243,932 participants.
| Metric | New Jersey Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) | UPS Retirement Plan |
|---|---|---|
| Health Score Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk | 54/100 (C) | 95/100 (A)* |
| Funding Ratio Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded) | 52.3% | 90.7%* |
| Total Assets | $34.0B | $9.7B |
| Total Liabilities | $65.0B | $10.7B* |
| Unfunded Liability | $31.0B | $993.0M* |
| Participants | 425,000 | 243,932 |
| 1-Year Investment Return | 5.1% | 6.7%* |
| Plan Type | public | corporate |
| PBGC Risk Level | high | low |
| Sponsor | State of New Jersey | United Parcel Service |
UPS Retirement Plan has a stronger Pension Health Score of 95/100 (A) compared to New Jersey Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) at 54/100 (C). Funding ratios differ by 38.4 percentage points (90.7% vs 52.3%). UPS Retirement Plan covers 243,932 participants.