Skip to main content
PensionRisk

Plumbers & Pipefitters National Pension Fund vs Oregon Public Employees Retirement System (PERS)

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

Plumbers & Pipefitters National Pension Fund (C) and Oregon Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) (B) are close on the LakeQuality rubric. Funding ratios sit at 64% and 77% 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 Plumbers & Pipefitters National Pension Fund at 56/100 (C). Funding ratios differ by 13.2 percentage points (77.3% vs 64.1%). Oregon Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) covers 375,000 participants.

MetricPlumbers & Pipefitters National Pension FundOregon Public Employees Retirement System (PERS)
Health Score
Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk
56/100 (C)72/100 (B)*
Funding Ratio
Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded)
64.1%77.3%*
Total Assets$21.0B$84.0B
Total Liabilities$32.8B*$108.7B
Unfunded Liability$11.8B*$24.7B
Participants430,000375,000
1-Year Investment Return5.5%5.7%*
Plan Typemultiemployerpublic
PBGC Risk Levelhighmoderate
SponsorUnited Association (UA)State of Oregon

Oregon Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 72/100 (B) compared to Plumbers & Pipefitters National Pension Fund at 56/100 (C). Funding ratios differ by 13.2 percentage points (77.3% vs 64.1%). Oregon Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) covers 375,000 participants.

Explore More