Skip to main content
PensionRisk

Ohio Public Employees Retirement System (OPERS) vs Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF)

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

Ohio Public Employees Retirement System (OPERS) (A) and Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) (A) are close on the LakeQuality rubric. Funding ratios sit at 83% and 81% 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

Ohio Public Employees Retirement System (OPERS) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 80/100 (A) compared to Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) at 80/100 (A). Funding ratios differ by 1.3 percentage points (82.5% vs 81.2%). Ohio Public Employees Retirement System (OPERS) covers 762,000 participants.

MetricOhio Public Employees Retirement System (OPERS)Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF)
Health Score
Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk
80/100 (A)80/100 (A)
Funding Ratio
Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded)
82.5%*81.2%
Total Assets$105.0B$51.2B
Total Liabilities$127.3B$63.1B*
Unfunded Liability$22.3B$11.9B*
Participants762,000438,000
1-Year Investment Return6.2%*5.8%
Plan Typepublicpublic
PBGC Risk Levellowlow
SponsorState of OhioState of Illinois

Ohio Public Employees Retirement System (OPERS) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 80/100 (A) compared to Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) at 80/100 (A). Funding ratios differ by 1.3 percentage points (82.5% vs 81.2%). Ohio Public Employees Retirement System (OPERS) covers 762,000 participants.

Explore More