Skip to main content
PensionRisk

North Carolina Retirement Systems vs Employees Retirement System of Texas (ERS)

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

North Carolina Retirement Systems (A) and Employees Retirement System of Texas (ERS) (B) are close on the LakeQuality rubric. Funding ratios sit at 87% and 70% respectively — within a few points of each other.

With grades this close, the comparison turns on plan-specific factors: status (active vs frozen), participant maturity, sponsor financial health, and multi-year trajectory rather than the headline composite.

Verdict

North Carolina Retirement Systems has a stronger Pension Health Score of 82/100 (A) compared to Employees Retirement System of Texas (ERS) at 66/100 (B). Funding ratios differ by 17.0 percentage points (87.1% vs 70.1%). North Carolina Retirement Systems covers 960,000 participants.

MetricNorth Carolina Retirement SystemsEmployees Retirement System of Texas (ERS)
Health Score
Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk
82/100 (A)*66/100 (B)
Funding Ratio
Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded)
87.1%*70.1%
Total Assets$112.0B$31.5B
Total Liabilities$128.6B$44.9B*
Unfunded Liability$16.6B$13.4B*
Participants960,000327,000
1-Year Investment Return6.6%*5.5%
Plan Typepublicpublic
PBGC Risk Levellowmoderate
SponsorState of North CarolinaState of Texas

North Carolina Retirement Systems has a stronger Pension Health Score of 82/100 (A) compared to Employees Retirement System of Texas (ERS) at 66/100 (B). Funding ratios differ by 17.0 percentage points (87.1% vs 70.1%). North Carolina Retirement Systems covers 960,000 participants.

Explore More