Skip to main content
PensionRisk

Sheet Metal Workers National Pension Fund vs Northrop Grumman Pension Plan

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

Sheet Metal Workers National Pension Fund (A) and Northrop Grumman Pension Plan (A) are close on the LakeQuality rubric. Funding ratios sit at 83% and 106% 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

Northrop Grumman Pension Plan has a stronger Pension Health Score of 100/100 (A) compared to Sheet Metal Workers National Pension Fund at 91/100 (A). Funding ratios differ by 23.6 percentage points (106.2% vs 82.6%). Northrop Grumman Pension Plan covers 106,531 participants.

MetricSheet Metal Workers National Pension FundNorthrop Grumman Pension Plan
Health Score
Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk
91/100 (A)100/100 (A)*
Funding Ratio
Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded)
82.6%106.2%*
Total Assets$7.5B$18.7B
Total Liabilities$9.1B*$17.6B
Unfunded Liability$1.6B$0*
Participants148,965106,531
1-Year Investment Return5.3%7.3%*
Plan Typemultiemployercorporate
PBGC Risk Levellowlow
SponsorSheet Metal Workers International AssociationNorthrop Grumman

Northrop Grumman Pension Plan has a stronger Pension Health Score of 100/100 (A) compared to Sheet Metal Workers National Pension Fund at 91/100 (A). Funding ratios differ by 23.6 percentage points (106.2% vs 82.6%). Northrop Grumman Pension Plan covers 106,531 participants.

Explore More

Related Comparisons