North Carolina Retirement Systems vs Pennsylvania Public School Employees Retirement System (PSERS)
Side-by-side pension health comparison from DOL and public plan data
Verdict
North Carolina Retirement Systems has a stronger Pension Health Score of 82/100 (A) compared to Pennsylvania Public School Employees Retirement System (PSERS) at 54/100 (C). Funding ratios differ by 29.3 percentage points (87.1% vs 57.8%). North Carolina Retirement Systems covers 960,000 participants.
| Metric | North Carolina Retirement Systems | Pennsylvania Public School Employees Retirement System (PSERS) |
|---|---|---|
| Health Score Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk | 82/100 (A)* | 54/100 (C) |
| Funding Ratio Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded) | 87.1%* | 57.8% |
| Total Assets | $112.0B | $72.0B |
| Total Liabilities | $128.6B | $124.6B* |
| Unfunded Liability | $16.6B* | $52.6B |
| Participants | 960,000 | 518,000 |
| 1-Year Investment Return | 6.6%* | 5.1% |
| Plan Type | public | public |
| PBGC Risk Level | low | high |
| Sponsor | State of North Carolina | State of Pennsylvania |
North Carolina Retirement Systems has a stronger Pension Health Score of 82/100 (A) compared to Pennsylvania Public School Employees Retirement System (PSERS) at 54/100 (C). Funding ratios differ by 29.3 percentage points (87.1% vs 57.8%). North Carolina Retirement Systems covers 960,000 participants.