Teacher Retirement System of Texas (TRS) vs Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF)
Side-by-side pension health comparison from DOL and public plan data
Verdict
Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 80/100 (A) compared to Teacher Retirement System of Texas (TRS) at 72/100 (B). Funding ratios differ by 3.1 percentage points (81.2% vs 78.1%). Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) covers 438,000 participants.
| Metric | Teacher Retirement System of Texas (TRS) | Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) |
|---|---|---|
| Health Score Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk | 72/100 (B) | 80/100 (A)* |
| Funding Ratio Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded) | 78.1% | 81.2%* |
| Total Assets | $193.0B | $51.2B |
| Total Liabilities | $247.0B | $63.1B* |
| Unfunded Liability | $54.0B | $11.9B* |
| Participants | 1,730,000 | 438,000 |
| 1-Year Investment Return | 6.1%* | 5.8% |
| Plan Type | public | public |
| PBGC Risk Level | moderate | low |
| Sponsor | State of Texas | State of Illinois |
Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 80/100 (A) compared to Teacher Retirement System of Texas (TRS) at 72/100 (B). Funding ratios differ by 3.1 percentage points (81.2% vs 78.1%). Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) covers 438,000 participants.