Skip to main content
PensionRisk

Ohio Public Employees Retirement System (OPERS) vs Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS)

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

Ohio Public Employees Retirement System (OPERS) (A) and Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) (A) are close on the LakeQuality rubric. Funding ratios sit at 83% and 98% 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

Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 86/100 (A) compared to Ohio Public Employees Retirement System (OPERS) at 80/100 (A). Funding ratios differ by 15.9 percentage points (98.4% vs 82.5%). Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) covers 665,000 participants.

MetricOhio Public Employees Retirement System (OPERS)Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS)
Health Score
Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk
80/100 (A)86/100 (A)*
Funding Ratio
Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded)
82.5%98.4%*
Total Assets$105.0B$122.0B
Total Liabilities$127.3B$124.0B*
Unfunded Liability$22.3B$2.0B*
Participants762,000665,000
1-Year Investment Return6.2%7.2%*
Plan Typepublicpublic
PBGC Risk Levellowlow
SponsorState of OhioState of Wisconsin

Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 86/100 (A) compared to Ohio Public Employees Retirement System (OPERS) at 80/100 (A). Funding ratios differ by 15.9 percentage points (98.4% vs 82.5%). Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) covers 665,000 participants.

Explore More