Skip to main content
PensionRisk

South Carolina Retirement System vs Mississippi Public Employees Retirement System (PERS)

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

South Carolina Retirement System (C) and Mississippi Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) (C) are close on the LakeQuality rubric. Funding ratios sit at 55% and 60% 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

Mississippi Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 54/100 (C) compared to South Carolina Retirement System at 52/100 (C). Funding ratios differ by 5.0 percentage points (60.1% vs 55.1%). Mississippi Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) covers 322,000 participants.

MetricSouth Carolina Retirement SystemMississippi Public Employees Retirement System (PERS)
Health Score
Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk
52/100 (C)54/100 (C)*
Funding Ratio
Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded)
55.1%60.1%*
Total Assets$35.5B$29.0B
Total Liabilities$64.4B$48.3B*
Unfunded Liability$28.9B$19.3B*
Participants575,000322,000
1-Year Investment Return5.2%5.3%*
Plan Typepublicpublic
PBGC Risk Levelhighhigh
SponsorState of South CarolinaState of Mississippi

Mississippi Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 54/100 (C) compared to South Carolina Retirement System at 52/100 (C). Funding ratios differ by 5.0 percentage points (60.1% vs 55.1%). Mississippi Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) covers 322,000 participants.

Explore More