Oregon Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) vs Employees Retirement System of Texas (ERS)
Side-by-side pension health comparison from DOL and public plan data
Verdict
Oregon Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 72/100 (B) compared to Employees Retirement System of Texas (ERS) at 66/100 (B). Funding ratios differ by 7.2 percentage points (77.3% vs 70.1%). Oregon Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) covers 375,000 participants.
| Metric | Oregon Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) | Employees Retirement System of Texas (ERS) |
|---|---|---|
| Health Score Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk | 72/100 (B)* | 66/100 (B) |
| Funding Ratio Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded) | 77.3%* | 70.1% |
| Total Assets | $84.0B | $31.5B |
| Total Liabilities | $108.7B | $44.9B* |
| Unfunded Liability | $24.7B | $13.4B* |
| Participants | 375,000 | 327,000 |
| 1-Year Investment Return | 5.7%* | 5.5% |
| Plan Type | public | public |
| PBGC Risk Level | moderate | moderate |
| Sponsor | State of Oregon | State of Texas |
Oregon Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 72/100 (B) compared to Employees Retirement System of Texas (ERS) at 66/100 (B). Funding ratios differ by 7.2 percentage points (77.3% vs 70.1%). Oregon Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) covers 375,000 participants.