Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) vs Iowa Public Employees Retirement System (IPERS)
Side-by-side pension health comparison from DOL and public plan data
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.