North Carolina Retirement Systems vs University of California Retirement Plan
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 University of California Retirement Plan at 78/100 (B). Funding ratios differ by 3.6 percentage points (87.1% vs 83.5%). North Carolina Retirement Systems covers 960,000 participants.
| Metric | North Carolina Retirement Systems | University of California Retirement Plan |
|---|---|---|
| Health Score Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk | 82/100 (A)* | 78/100 (B) |
| Funding Ratio Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded) | 87.1%* | 83.5% |
| Total Assets | $112.0B | $82.0B |
| Total Liabilities | $128.6B | $98.2B* |
| Unfunded Liability | $16.6B | $16.2B* |
| Participants | 960,000 | 305,000 |
| 1-Year Investment Return | 6.6% | 7.2%* |
| Plan Type | public | public |
| PBGC Risk Level | low | low |
| Sponsor | State of North Carolina | University of California |
North Carolina Retirement Systems has a stronger Pension Health Score of 82/100 (A) compared to University of California Retirement Plan at 78/100 (B). Funding ratios differ by 3.6 percentage points (87.1% vs 83.5%). North Carolina Retirement Systems covers 960,000 participants.