Skip to main content
PensionRisk

UFCW International Union Industry Pension Fund vs Mississippi Public Employees Retirement System (PERS)

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

UFCW International Union Industry Pension Fund and Mississippi Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) are meaningfully apart on the LakeQuality pension-health rubric: UFCW International Union Industry Pension Fund grades A while Mississippi Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) grades C. Funding ratios: 86% vs 60%.

UFCW International Union Industry Pension Fund comes out ahead on the composite rubric. For a participant in either plan, the spread is informative but not directly actionable — pension participation is not portable, so the relevant question is what each plan's funded-status trajectory means for that participant's benefit security.

Verdict

UFCW International Union Industry Pension Fund has a stronger Pension Health Score of 93/100 (A) compared to Mississippi Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) at 54/100 (C). Funding ratios differ by 25.8 percentage points (85.9% vs 60.1%). UFCW International Union Industry Pension Fund covers 365,494 participants.

MetricUFCW International Union Industry Pension FundMississippi Public Employees Retirement System (PERS)
Health Score
Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk
93/100 (A)*54/100 (C)
Funding Ratio
Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded)
85.9%*60.1%
Total Assets$5.2B$29.0B
Total Liabilities$6.0B*$48.3B
Unfunded Liability$848.9M*$19.3B
Participants365,494322,000
1-Year Investment Return4.8%5.3%*
Plan Typemultiemployerpublic
PBGC Risk Levellowhigh
SponsorUFCW InternationalState of Mississippi

UFCW International Union Industry Pension Fund has a stronger Pension Health Score of 93/100 (A) compared to Mississippi Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) at 54/100 (C). Funding ratios differ by 25.8 percentage points (85.9% vs 60.1%). UFCW International Union Industry Pension Fund covers 365,494 participants.

Explore More