Skip to main content
PensionRisk

University of California Retirement Plan vs Los Angeles City Employees Retirement System (LACERS)

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

University of California Retirement Plan (B) and Los Angeles City Employees Retirement System (LACERS) (B) are close on the LakeQuality rubric. Funding ratios sit at 84% and 76% 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

University of California Retirement Plan has a stronger Pension Health Score of 78/100 (B) compared to Los Angeles City Employees Retirement System (LACERS) at 70/100 (B). Funding ratios differ by 7.7 percentage points (83.5% vs 75.8%). University of California Retirement Plan covers 305,000 participants.

MetricUniversity of California Retirement PlanLos Angeles City Employees Retirement System (LACERS)
Health Score
Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk
78/100 (B)*70/100 (B)
Funding Ratio
Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded)
83.5%*75.8%
Total Assets$82.0B$20.1B
Total Liabilities$98.2B$26.5B*
Unfunded Liability$16.2B$6.4B*
Participants305,00049,000
1-Year Investment Return7.2%*5.9%
Plan Typepublicpublic
PBGC Risk Levellowmoderate
SponsorUniversity of CaliforniaCity of Los Angeles

University of California Retirement Plan has a stronger Pension Health Score of 78/100 (B) compared to Los Angeles City Employees Retirement System (LACERS) at 70/100 (B). Funding ratios differ by 7.7 percentage points (83.5% vs 75.8%). University of California Retirement Plan covers 305,000 participants.

Explore More

Related Comparisons