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
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.
| Metric | UFCW International Union Industry Pension Fund | Mississippi 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 |
| Participants | 365,494 | 322,000 |
| 1-Year Investment Return | 4.8% | 5.3%* |
| Plan Type | multiemployer | public |
| PBGC Risk Level | low | high |
| Sponsor | UFCW International | State 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.