Tennessee Consolidated Retirement System (TCRS) vs Iowa Public Employees Retirement System (IPERS)
Side-by-side pension health comparison from DOL and public plan data
Tennessee Consolidated Retirement System (TCRS) (A) and Iowa Public Employees Retirement System (IPERS) (A) are close on the LakeQuality rubric. Funding ratios sit at 92% and 85% 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
Tennessee Consolidated Retirement System (TCRS) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 83/100 (A) compared to Iowa Public Employees Retirement System (IPERS) at 80/100 (A). Funding ratios differ by 7.3 percentage points (92.1% vs 84.8%). Tennessee Consolidated Retirement System (TCRS) covers 378,000 participants.
| Metric | Tennessee Consolidated Retirement System (TCRS) | Iowa Public Employees Retirement System (IPERS) |
|---|---|---|
| Health Score Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk | 83/100 (A)* | 80/100 (A) |
| Funding Ratio Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded) | 92.1%* | 84.8% |
| Total Assets | $57.0B | $35.5B |
| Total Liabilities | $61.9B | $41.9B* |
| Unfunded Liability | $4.9B* | $6.4B |
| Participants | 378,000 | 372,000 |
| 1-Year Investment Return | 6.8%* | 6.4% |
| Plan Type | public | public |
| PBGC Risk Level | low | low |
| Sponsor | State of Tennessee | State of Iowa |
Tennessee Consolidated Retirement System (TCRS) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 83/100 (A) compared to Iowa Public Employees Retirement System (IPERS) at 80/100 (A). Funding ratios differ by 7.3 percentage points (92.1% vs 84.8%). Tennessee Consolidated Retirement System (TCRS) covers 378,000 participants.