FY2024 source-reconciled actuarial data · Public Plans Database

Seattle Employees Retirement System

Funded ratio, unfunded liability, member counts, and 23-year financial history for Seattle Employees Retirement System, sourced from the Public Plans Database (Boston College CRR) and cross-checked against actuarial valuations.

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

Funded Ratio: 76.0% (At Risk) Seattle Employees Retirement System funded ratio compared to national public pension benchmark. FUNDED RATIO 76.0% At Risk Nat'l avg 75.49869791666667% 0% 60 70 80 100% Healthy > 80% · At-risk 70-80% · Critical < 60%
Seattle Employees Retirement System funded ratio is 76.0 percent, classified as At Risk. National public-pension benchmark is 75.49869791666667 percent.
Actuarial funded ratio
76.0%
Health grade
BReported funded ratio above the portfolio average range
Actuarial assets
$4.41B
Members
21,023

According to the Public Plans Database, compiled by the Boston College Center for Retirement Research, Seattle 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

Seattle Employees Retirement System lost 11.5 points from FY2001 (87.5%) to FY2024 (76.0%) on the reconciled series.

Seattle Employees Retirement System on a sliding funded path

According to the Public Plans Database, Seattle Employees Retirement System lost 11.5 points on the reconciled series from FY2001 to FY2024, and now reports 76.0% (grade B).

76.0%
Funded · #48 of 192
B
Health grade
$1.39B
Actuarial unfunded liability
-11.5pp
FY2001→FY2024
Subscribe to funded-ratio changes (RSS)

Actuarial Unfunded Liability

$1.39B

Above-median unfunded liability · source-reported UAAL

Total Members

21,023

active + retired + vested

1-Year Return

8.9%

Above assumed rate · net investment return

-1.0pp vs 5-yr avg

5-Year Avg Return

9.9%

Above assumed rate · annualized, net of fees

C+
Composite Health Score
60/100
Seattle 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 C-
76.0%
Actuarial assets as a share of liabilities
Contribution Discipline C-
100.5%
Share of the actuarially required contribution actually paid
Investment Returns A+
9.9%
5-year annualized investment return
Unfunded Burden C-
24.3%
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: 9.7K active, 7.6K retired, 0 separated Plan participant breakdown showing active workers, retirees, and separated-vested members. PARTICIPANT MIX 21.0K total members 46% 36% Active 9.7K Retired 7.6K Separated 0 Active-to-Retiree 1.28 · Transitioning
Plan participant breakdown: 9.7K active workers, 7.6K retirees, 0 separated-vested members. Sustainability rating: Transitioning.

Investment Policy Mix

Asset Allocation: 55% equity, 25% fixed income, 17% alternatives Seattle Employees Retirement System investment policy mix as reported in its CAFR and actuarial valuation. ASSET ALLOCATION $4.3B 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%
Seattle 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 11.5 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.

60%70%80%90%100% 20012007201120142017202020232024 76%

What changed, FY2023 to FY2024

0.3 pts funded ratio

Seattle Employees Retirement System's funded ratio was effectively unchanged from FY2023 to FY2024, moving 0.3 points, with assets and accrued liability growing at a similar pace.

Funded ratio
75.8% → 76.0%
Actuarial assets
$4.14B → $4.41B (+6.5%)
Accrued liability
$5.47B → $5.80B (+6.1%)
Where the 0.3-point move came from
Assets
+4.9 pts
Accrued liability
-4.7 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 76.0%
2023 75.8%
2022 75.7%
2021 75.0%
2020 71.6%
2019 68.9%
2018 68.2%
2017 69.9%
2016 68.1%
2015 66.5%
2014 66.0%
2013 64.2%
2012 63.5%
2011 68.3%
2010 74.3%
2009 62.0%
2007 92.4%
2005 88.8%
2003 85.9%
2001 87.5%

What the Data Says About Seattle Employees Retirement System

Seattle Employees Retirement System shows a comfortably above-average funding position, 1 points above the 75.5% national average across tracked plans. A 5-year average investment return of 9.9% factors into the plan's overall trajectory.

For Washington taxpayers and plan members, the $1.39B 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

9,740
Active Members
7,616
Retirees
21,023
Total Members

Plan Details

Plan Type
General State
State
Washington
Market Assets
$4.33B
Source: Public Plans Database (PPD)
Boston College CRR / NASRA

Plans With a Similar Funded Ratio

The closest plans nationwide to Seattle Employees Retirement System's 87.0% 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. Seattle Employees Retirement System ranks #48 of 192 by funded ratio and #115 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.