Tennessee Consolidated Retirement System (TCRS) vs Minnesota Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA)
Side-by-side pension health comparison from DOL and public plan data
Verdict
Tennessee Consolidated Retirement System (TCRS) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 83/100 (A) compared to Minnesota Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) at 71/100 (B). Funding ratios differ by 13.0 percentage points (92.1% vs 79.1%). Tennessee Consolidated Retirement System (TCRS) covers 378,000 participants.
| Metric | Tennessee Consolidated Retirement System (TCRS) | Minnesota Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) |
|---|---|---|
| Health Score Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk | 83/100 (A)* | 71/100 (B) |
| Funding Ratio Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded) | 92.1%* | 79.1% |
| Total Assets | $57.0B | $35.0B |
| Total Liabilities | $61.9B | $44.2B* |
| Unfunded Liability | $4.9B* | $9.2B |
| Participants | 378,000 | 378,000 |
| 1-Year Investment Return | 6.8%* | 5.9% |
| Plan Type | public | public |
| PBGC Risk Level | low | moderate |
| Sponsor | State of Tennessee | State of Minnesota |
Tennessee Consolidated Retirement System (TCRS) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 83/100 (A) compared to Minnesota Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) at 71/100 (B). Funding ratios differ by 13.0 percentage points (92.1% vs 79.1%). Tennessee Consolidated Retirement System (TCRS) covers 378,000 participants.