Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) vs Iowa Public Employees Retirement System (IPERS)
Side-by-side pension health comparison from DOL and public plan data
Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) (A) and Iowa Public Employees Retirement System (IPERS) (A) are close on the LakeQuality rubric. Funding ratios sit at 98% and 85% 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 Iowa Public Employees Retirement System (IPERS) at 80/100 (A). Funding ratios differ by 13.6 percentage points (98.4% vs 84.8%). Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) covers 665,000 participants.
| Metric | Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) | Iowa Public Employees Retirement System (IPERS) |
|---|---|---|
| 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%* | 84.8% |
| Total Assets | $122.0B | $35.5B |
| Total Liabilities | $124.0B | $41.9B* |
| Unfunded Liability | $2.0B* | $6.4B |
| Participants | 665,000 | 372,000 |
| 1-Year Investment Return | 7.2%* | 6.4% |
| Plan Type | public | public |
| PBGC Risk Level | low | low |
| Sponsor | State of Wisconsin | State of Iowa |
Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 86/100 (A) compared to Iowa Public Employees Retirement System (IPERS) at 80/100 (A). Funding ratios differ by 13.6 percentage points (98.4% vs 84.8%). Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) covers 665,000 participants.