FY2023 source-reconciled actuarial data · Public Plans Database

Jersey City Municipal Employees Pension Fund

A full financial snapshot of Jersey City Municipal Employees Pension Fund: funded ratio, unfunded liability, member counts, and investment returns, drawn from 23 years of history in the Public Plans Database (Boston College CRR) and verified against actuarial valuations.

By · · New Jersey · Municipal Plan · Data through FY2023

Funded Ratio: 56.9% (Critical) Jersey City Municipal Employees Pension Fund funded ratio compared to national public pension benchmark. FUNDED RATIO 56.9% Critical Nat'l avg 75.49869791666667% 0% 60 70 80 100% Healthy > 80% · At-risk 70-80% · Critical < 60%
Jersey City Municipal Employees Pension Fund funded ratio is 56.9 percent, classified as Critical. National public-pension benchmark is 75.49869791666667 percent.
Actuarial funded ratio
56.9%
Health grade
CReported funded ratio below full funding
Actuarial assets
$170M
Members
1,166

According to the Public Plans Database, compiled by the Boston College Center for Retirement Research, Jersey City Municipal Employees Pension Fund is one of 197 public pension plans tracked nationwide. The plan card reports source-reconciled actuarial figures through FY2023; the multi-year table includes only years whose reported ratio ties to its actuarial dollars. This site’s database copy was last loaded in July 2026. See our methodology for the full source and update cadence.

Smaller membership book

Jersey City Municipal Employees Pension Fund ranks #180 of 190 by reported members (1,166), bottom-third membership book among plans with a count.

Jersey City Municipal Employees Pension Fund in the smaller-membership third

According to the Public Plans Database, Jersey City Municipal Employees Pension Fund carries a bottom-third membership book (1,166, #180 of 190) with a 56.9% actuarial funded ratio (grade C).

56.9%
Funded · #120 of 192
C
Health grade
1,166
Members · #180 of 190
-27.4pp
FY2001→FY2023
Subscribe to funded-ratio changes (RSS)

Actuarial Unfunded Liability

$128M

Modest unfunded liability · source-reported UAAL

Total Members

1,166

active + retired + vested

1-Year Return

-20.9%

Negative return · net investment return

-25.6pp vs 5-yr avg

5-Year Avg Return

4.8%

Below assumed rate · annualized, net of fees

F
Composite Health Score
13/100
Jersey City Municipal Employees Pension Fund

Transparent derived index from public pension-plan filings, not an official rating. A 4-dimension composite (funded ratio, contribution discipline, 5-year investment return, unfunded burden), each scored against this dataset's own percentile distribution across 197 reporting plans. Not the same as the plan's headline funded-ratio grade above. See the exact dimensions, weights, and formula.

Funded Ratio F
56.9%
Actuarial assets as a share of liabilities
Contribution Discipline F
100.0%
Share of the actuarially required contribution actually paid
Investment Returns F
4.8%
5-year annualized investment return
Unfunded Burden F
44.3%
Unfunded liability as a share of total obligations
How this score is calculated (benchmark table)
Dimension P10 P25 P50 P75 P90 Weight
Funded ratio (higher = better) 57.6% 67.2% 75.0% 87.0% 97.6% 0.35
Contribution discipline (ARC) (higher = better) 88.4% 100.0% 100.0% 104.1% 122.1% 0.25
5yr investment return (higher = better) 6.4% 7.5% 8.3% 9.1% 9.9% 0.20
Unfunded burden (lower = better) 2.0% 12.7% 25.0% 33.1% 42.4% 0.20

Percentiles computed across all 197 plans in this database with a reported value for that metric (2026-09-09). A dimension a plan does not report drops out of its composite, and that weight redistributes across the dimensions it does report, so thin reporting never silently lowers a score relative to a fully-reported peer.

Participant Composition

Participants: 695 active, 442 retired, 0 separated Plan participant breakdown showing active workers, retirees, and separated-vested members. PARTICIPANT MIX 1.2K total members 60% 38% Active 695 Retired 442 Separated 0 Active-to-Retiree 1.57 · Sustainable
Plan participant breakdown: 695 active workers, 442 retirees, 0 separated-vested members. Sustainability rating: Sustainable.

Investment Policy Mix

Asset Allocation: 55% equity, 25% fixed income, 17% alternatives Jersey City Municipal Employees Pension Fund investment policy mix as reported in its CAFR and actuarial valuation. ASSET ALLOCATION $161M market assets · CAFR / actuarial valuation 55% 25% 17% Equity 55.0% Fixed Inc. 25.0% Alternatives 17.0% Cash 3.0% Investment Stance: Growth-Tilted · Equity + Alts 72%
Jersey City Municipal Employees Pension Fund asset allocation: 55% equity, 25% fixed income, 17% alternatives, 3% cash. Investment stance: Growth-Tilted.

Funded ratio, 2001 to 2023

Assets as a share of the benefits already promised, one point per reported year. Down 27.4 points across the series. This is the multi-year table's series, so its last point can be a later year than the plan card above, which reports the plan's own latest valuation.

30%40%50%60%70%80%90% 20012006200820102012201320152017201920212023 56.9%

What changed, FY2021 to FY2023

0.4 pts funded ratio

Jersey City Municipal Employees Pension Fund's funded ratio was effectively unchanged from FY2021 to FY2023, moving 0.4 points, with assets and accrued liability growing at a similar pace.

Funded ratio
56.5% → 56.9%
Actuarial assets
$154M → $170M (+10.4%)
Accrued liability
$272M → $298M (+9.6%)
Where the 0.4-point move came from
Assets
+5.9 pts
Accrued liability
-5.5 pts

Accrued liability is the source-reported value for benefits already promised. The two contributions are the move the ratio would have made on the prior year’s liability (assets) and the remainder (liability); they sum to the total by construction. Both years shown provide source-reconciled actuarial assets and liability, so neither figure rests on a ratio published on its own. Source: Public Plans Database (Boston College CRR / NASRA), loaded July 2026. See our funding-change board for how this plan’s move compares with the rest of the dataset.

Historical Actuarial Funding

Year Actuarial Ratio
2023 56.9%
2021 56.5%
2019 51.2%
2017 56.3%
2015 51.5%
2013 55.4%
2012 42.0%
2010 42.8%
2008 51.8%
2006 52.4%
2001 84.3%

What the Data Says About Jersey City Municipal Employees Pension Fund

Jersey City Municipal Employees Pension Fund's funded ratio lands close to the middle of the national distribution, 19 points below the 75.5% national average across tracked plans. A 5-year average investment return of 4.8% factors into the plan's overall trajectory.

For New Jersey taxpayers and plan members, the $128M source-reported actuarial unfunded liability is the shortfall this plan must close over time.

Where this data comes from + how funding gaps get resolved

These figures come from the Public Plans Database, a collaboration between the Boston College Center for Retirement Research and NASRA that compiles them from each plan's Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports (CAFRs) and actuarial valuations. The relationship between contribution adequacy and investment performance determines whether an unfunded liability narrows or expands year over year, and the gap itself is typically closed through some combination of higher contributions, investment returns, or benefit modifications. See our methodology for how public-pension funding differs from ERISA-backed private plans, and our disclaimer below before acting on this data.

Membership

695
Active Members
442
Retirees
1,166
Total Members

Plan Details

Plan Type
Municipal
State
New Jersey
Market Assets
$161M
Source: Public Plans Database (PPD)
Boston College CRR / NASRA

Plans With a Similar Funded Ratio

The closest plans nationwide to Jersey City Municipal Employees Pension Fund's 70.7% funded ratio.

Showing 5 of 191 plans nationwide with a reported funded ratio.

Every figure on PlainPension is rendered directly from the Public Plans Database (Boston College Center for Retirement Research), no number is typed in by an editor. Jersey City Municipal Employees Pension Fund ranks #120 of 192 by funded ratio and #180 of 190 by membership. This information is for informational purposes only and does not constitute professional advice, consult a qualified professional before acting on it. See our editorial standards & corrections policy, the typed corrections pathway, the methodology behind these numbers, or report a data error. Data current as of July 2026.