Skip to main content
PensionRisk

Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) vs Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF)

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

Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) (A) and Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) (A) are close on the LakeQuality rubric. Funding ratios sit at 98% and 81% 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

Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 86/100 (A) compared to Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) at 80/100 (A). Funding ratios differ by 17.2 percentage points (98.4% vs 81.2%). Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) covers 665,000 participants.

MetricWisconsin Retirement System (WRS)Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF)
Health Score
Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk
86/100 (A)*80/100 (A)
Funding Ratio
Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded)
98.4%*81.2%
Total Assets$122.0B$51.2B
Total Liabilities$124.0B$63.1B*
Unfunded Liability$2.0B*$11.9B
Participants665,000438,000
1-Year Investment Return7.2%*5.8%
Plan Typepublicpublic
PBGC Risk Levellowlow
SponsorState of WisconsinState of Illinois

Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 86/100 (A) compared to Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) at 80/100 (A). Funding ratios differ by 17.2 percentage points (98.4% vs 81.2%). Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) covers 665,000 participants.

Explore More