Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) vs New Jersey Public Employees Retirement System (PERS)
Side-by-side pension health comparison from DOL and public plan data
Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) and New Jersey Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) are meaningfully apart on the LakeQuality pension-health rubric: Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) grades A while New Jersey Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) grades C. Funding ratios: 98% vs 52%.
Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) comes out ahead on the composite rubric. For a participant in either plan, the spread is informative but not directly actionable — pension participation is not portable, so the relevant question is what each plan's funded-status trajectory means for that participant's benefit security.
Verdict
Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 86/100 (A) compared to New Jersey Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) at 54/100 (C). Funding ratios differ by 46.1 percentage points (98.4% vs 52.3%). Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) covers 665,000 participants.
| Metric | Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) | New Jersey Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) |
|---|---|---|
| Health Score Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk | 86/100 (A)* | 54/100 (C) |
| Funding Ratio Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded) | 98.4%* | 52.3% |
| Total Assets | $122.0B | $34.0B |
| Total Liabilities | $124.0B | $65.0B* |
| Unfunded Liability | $2.0B* | $31.0B |
| Participants | 665,000 | 425,000 |
| 1-Year Investment Return | 7.2%* | 5.1% |
| Plan Type | public | public |
| PBGC Risk Level | low | high |
| Sponsor | State of Wisconsin | State of New Jersey |
Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 86/100 (A) compared to New Jersey Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) at 54/100 (C). Funding ratios differ by 46.1 percentage points (98.4% vs 52.3%). Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) covers 665,000 participants.