Texas County & District Retirement System (TCDRS) vs UFCW International Union Industry Pension Fund
Side-by-side pension health comparison from DOL and public plan data
Texas County & District Retirement System (TCDRS) (A) and UFCW International Union Industry Pension Fund (A) are close on the LakeQuality rubric. Funding ratios sit at 86% and 86% 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
UFCW International Union Industry Pension Fund has a stronger Pension Health Score of 93/100 (A) compared to Texas County & District Retirement System (TCDRS) at 81/100 (A). Funding ratios differ by 0.3 percentage points (85.9% vs 86.2%). UFCW International Union Industry Pension Fund covers 365,494 participants.
| Metric | Texas County & District Retirement System (TCDRS) | UFCW International Union Industry Pension Fund |
|---|---|---|
| Health Score Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk | 81/100 (A) | 93/100 (A)* |
| Funding Ratio Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded) | 86.2%* | 85.9% |
| Total Assets | $39.5B | $5.2B |
| Total Liabilities | $45.8B | $6.0B* |
| Unfunded Liability | $6.3B | $848.9M* |
| Participants | 385,000 | 365,494 |
| 1-Year Investment Return | 6.6%* | 4.8% |
| Plan Type | public | multiemployer |
| PBGC Risk Level | low | low |
| Sponsor | Texas Counties | UFCW International |
UFCW International Union Industry Pension Fund has a stronger Pension Health Score of 93/100 (A) compared to Texas County & District Retirement System (TCDRS) at 81/100 (A). Funding ratios differ by 0.3 percentage points (85.9% vs 86.2%). UFCW International Union Industry Pension Fund covers 365,494 participants.