Skip to main content
PensionRisk

Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) vs New Jersey Teachers Pension & Annuity Fund (TPAF)

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

Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) and New Jersey Teachers Pension & Annuity Fund (TPAF) are meaningfully apart on the LakeQuality pension-health rubric: Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) grades A while New Jersey Teachers Pension & Annuity Fund (TPAF) grades C. Funding ratios: 98% vs 48%.

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 Teachers Pension & Annuity Fund (TPAF) at 51/100 (C). Funding ratios differ by 50.3 percentage points (98.4% vs 48.1%). Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) covers 665,000 participants.

MetricWisconsin Retirement System (WRS)New Jersey Teachers Pension & Annuity Fund (TPAF)
Health Score
Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk
86/100 (A)*51/100 (C)
Funding Ratio
Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded)
98.4%*48.1%
Total Assets$122.0B$28.5B
Total Liabilities$124.0B$59.3B*
Unfunded Liability$2.0B*$30.8B
Participants665,000268,000
1-Year Investment Return7.2%*4.9%
Plan Typepublicpublic
PBGC Risk Levellowhigh
SponsorState of WisconsinState of New Jersey

Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 86/100 (A) compared to New Jersey Teachers Pension & Annuity Fund (TPAF) at 51/100 (C). Funding ratios differ by 50.3 percentage points (98.4% vs 48.1%). Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) covers 665,000 participants.

Explore More