Skip to main content
PensionRisk

North Carolina Retirement Systems vs UPS Retirement Plan

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

North Carolina Retirement Systems (A) and UPS Retirement Plan (A) are close on the PensionRisk rubric. Funding ratios sit at 87% and 91% 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.

Reviewed by PensionRisk Editorial Team · Updated

Verdict

UPS Retirement Plan has a stronger Pension Health Score of 95/100 (A) compared to North Carolina Retirement Systems at 82/100 (A). Funding ratios differ by 3.6 percentage points (90.7% vs 87.1%). UPS Retirement Plan covers 243,932 participants.

MetricNorth Carolina Retirement SystemsUPS Retirement Plan
Health Score
Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk
82/100 (A)95/100 (A)*
Funding Ratio
Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded)
87.1%90.7%*
Total Assets$112.0B$9.7B
Total Liabilities$128.6B$10.7B*
Unfunded Liability$16.6B$993.0M*
Participants960,000243,932
1-Year Investment Return6.6%6.7%*
Plan Typepubliccorporate
PBGC Risk Levellowlow
SponsorState of North CarolinaUnited Parcel Service

UPS Retirement Plan has a stronger Pension Health Score of 95/100 (A) compared to North Carolina Retirement Systems at 82/100 (A). Funding ratios differ by 3.6 percentage points (90.7% vs 87.1%). UPS Retirement Plan covers 243,932 participants.

Explore More

North Carolina Retirement Systems full profile|UPS Retirement Plan full profile

Related Comparisons