Oregon Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) vs Pennsylvania State Employees Retirement System (SERS)
Side-by-side pension health comparison from DOL and public plan data
Oregon Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) (B) and Pennsylvania State Employees Retirement System (SERS) (C) are close on the LakeQuality rubric. Funding ratios sit at 77% and 63% 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
Oregon Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 72/100 (B) compared to Pennsylvania State Employees Retirement System (SERS) at 57/100 (C). Funding ratios differ by 14.2 percentage points (77.3% vs 63.1%). Oregon Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) covers 375,000 participants.
| Metric | Oregon Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) | Pennsylvania State Employees Retirement System (SERS) |
|---|---|---|
| Health Score Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk | 72/100 (B)* | 57/100 (C) |
| Funding Ratio Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded) | 77.3%* | 63.1% |
| Total Assets | $84.0B | $36.2B |
| Total Liabilities | $108.7B | $57.4B* |
| Unfunded Liability | $24.7B | $21.2B* |
| Participants | 375,000 | 245,000 |
| 1-Year Investment Return | 5.7%* | 5.4% |
| Plan Type | public | public |
| PBGC Risk Level | moderate | high |
| Sponsor | State of Oregon | State of Pennsylvania |
Oregon Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 72/100 (B) compared to Pennsylvania State Employees Retirement System (SERS) at 57/100 (C). Funding ratios differ by 14.2 percentage points (77.3% vs 63.1%). Oregon Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) covers 375,000 participants.