FY2024 source-reconciled actuarial data · Public Plans Database

Oregon Employees Retirement System

Drawing on 23 years of Public Plans Database history (Boston College CRR), this page covers Oregon Employees Retirement System's funded ratio, unfunded liability, member counts, and investment returns, cross-checked against actuarial valuations.

By · · Oregon · General State Plan · Data through FY2024

Funded Ratio: 72.4% (At Risk) Oregon Employees Retirement System funded ratio compared to national public pension benchmark. FUNDED RATIO 72.4% At Risk Nat'l avg 75.49869791666667% 0% 60 70 80 100% Healthy > 80% · At-risk 70-80% · Critical < 60%
Oregon Employees Retirement System funded ratio is 72.4 percent, classified as At Risk. National public-pension benchmark is 75.49869791666667 percent.
Actuarial funded ratio
72.4%
Health grade
BReported funded ratio above the portfolio average range
Actuarial assets
$77.00B
Members
399,351

According to the Public Plans Database, compiled by the Boston College Center for Retirement Research, Oregon Employees Retirement System is one of 197 public pension plans tracked nationwide. The plan card reports source-reconciled actuarial figures through FY2024; 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.

Sliding funded-ratio path

Oregon Employees Retirement System lost 24.1 points from FY2001 (96.4%) to FY2024 (72.4%) on the reconciled series.

Oregon Employees Retirement System on a sliding funded path

According to the Public Plans Database, Oregon Employees Retirement System lost 24.1 points on the reconciled series from FY2001 to FY2024, and now reports 72.4% (grade B).

72.4%
Funded · #45 of 192
B
Health grade
$29.38B
Actuarial unfunded liability
-24.1pp
FY2001→FY2024
Subscribe to funded-ratio changes (RSS)

Actuarial Unfunded Liability

$29.38B

Very large unfunded liability · source-reported UAAL

Total Members

399,351

active + retired + vested

1-Year Return

5.3%

Near assumed rate · net investment return

-0.7pp vs 5-yr avg

5-Year Avg Return

5.9%

Near assumed rate · annualized, net of fees

F
Composite Health Score
32/100
Oregon Employees Retirement System

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 D
72.4%
Actuarial assets as a share of liabilities
Contribution Discipline F
100.0%
Share of the actuarially required contribution actually paid
Investment Returns F
5.9%
5-year annualized investment return
Unfunded Burden D
25.7%
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: 183.6K active, 163.2K retired, 0 separated Plan participant breakdown showing active workers, retirees, and separated-vested members. PARTICIPANT MIX 399.4K total members 46% 41% Active 183.6K Retired 163.2K Separated 0 Active-to-Retiree 1.13 · Transitioning
Plan participant breakdown: 183.6K active workers, 163.2K retirees, 0 separated-vested members. Sustainability rating: Transitioning.

Investment Policy Mix

Asset Allocation: 55% equity, 25% fixed income, 17% alternatives Oregon Employees Retirement System investment policy mix as reported in its CAFR and actuarial valuation. ASSET ALLOCATION $85.1B 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%
Oregon Employees Retirement System asset allocation: 55% equity, 25% fixed income, 17% alternatives, 3% cash. Investment stance: Growth-Tilted.

Funded ratio, 2001 to 2024

Assets as a share of the benefits already promised, one point per reported year. Down 24.1 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.

70%80%90%100%110%120% 200120042007201020132016201920222024 72.4%

What changed, FY2023 to FY2024

0.4 pts funded ratio

Oregon Employees Retirement System's funded ratio was effectively unchanged from FY2023 to FY2024, moving 0.4 points, with assets and accrued liability growing at a similar pace.

Funded ratio
72.8% → 72.4%
Actuarial assets
$74.88B → $77.00B (+2.8%)
Accrued liability
$102.91B → $106.38B (+3.4%)
Where the 0.4-point move came from
Assets
+2.1 pts
Accrued liability
-2.4 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
2024 72.4%
2023 72.8%
2022 79.6%
2021 75.9%
2020 78.6%
2019 74.9%
2018 80.1%
2017 75.4%
2016 78.7%
2015 83.6%
2014 95.9%
2013 90.7%
2012 82.0%
2011 86.9%
2010 85.8%
2009 80.2%
2008 112.2%
2007 110.5%
2006 104.2%
2005 96.2%

What the Data Says About Oregon Employees Retirement System

Oregon Employees Retirement System shows a comfortably above-average funding position, 3 points below the 75.5% national average across tracked plans. A 5-year average investment return of 5.9% factors into the plan's overall trajectory.

For Oregon taxpayers and plan members, the $29.38B 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

183,642
Active Members
163,196
Retirees
399,351
Total Members

Plan Details

Plan Type
General State
State
Oregon
Market Assets
$85.10B
Source: Public Plans Database (PPD)
Boston College CRR / NASRA

Plans With a Similar Funded Ratio

The closest plans nationwide to Oregon Employees Retirement System's 88.2% 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. Oregon Employees Retirement System ranks #45 of 192 by funded ratio and #26 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.