CalPERS 467 Billion in Assets: Top 10 US Public Pension Funds

Findings

CalPERS leads at $467.05 billion in market assets with 71.3 percent funded ratio

PlainPension ingests Public Plans Database data for 197 US public pension plans, where California Public Employees Retirement System records $467.05 billion in the market assets column. CalPERS funded ratio column shows 71.3 percent, paired with $187.88 billion unfunded liability in the same dataset row. This positions CalPERS as the largest US public pension plan by market assets among 4718 plan-year financial records. CalPERS profile pulls these values directly from actuarial valuations. Public Plans Database — Center for State and Local Government Excellence, 2024

California state pension summaries in PlainPension aggregate data across 15 indexed plans, but CalPERS alone accounts for the top market assets value. Unfunded liability for CalPERS reaches $187.88 billion, second only to one other plan in the Public Plans Database. Funded ratio of 71.3 percent for CalPERS exceeds several top-10 peers when joining plan data to state_fips equivalents. Center for Retirement Research at Boston College — Public Plans Data, 2024

Plan-year financial records table in PlainPension enables queries on CalPERS market assets growth over time, with the latest snapshot at $467.05 billion. California hosts this plan alongside others, contributing to state-level pension summaries for 51 US jurisdictions. Unfunded liability column for CalPERS at $187.88 billion supports per-plan health assessments. California pension overview displays aggregated metrics from these records.

Public Plans Database funded ratio calculations use market assets and unfunded liability for CalPERS, yielding 71.3 percent. This value appears in 4718 total records across 197 plans. CalPERS data joins seamlessly to California state summaries, isolating the plan's role in national rankings. State Comptroller Reports confirm these figures through actuarial valuations. State Comptroller Reports — Plan-Level Actuarial Valuations, 2024

CalSTRS and New York State and Local Retirement Systems anchor positions 2 and 3 at $316.92 billion and $249.51 billion market assets

California State Teachers Retirement System holds $316.92 billion in market assets per Public Plans Database, securing second place among 197 US public pension plans. CalSTRS funded ratio registers 76.7 percent, with $96.29 billion unfunded liability in the dataset. New York State and Local Retirement Systems follows at $249.51 billion market assets, 55.5 percent funded ratio, and $199.84 billion unfunded liability—the largest single-plan unfunded liability value. CalSTRS profile exposes these columns for developer access. Public Plans Database — Center for State and Local Government Excellence, 2024

Public Plans Database plan-year financial records count 4718 entries, where CalSTRS $316.92 billion market assets trails only CalPERS. New York State and Local Retirement Systems $199.84 billion unfunded liability tops all 197 plans. California state summaries link CalSTRS data, while New York state summaries aggregate NYSLRS metrics. Funded ratio for CalSTRS at 76.7 percent outperforms NYSLRS 55.5 percent directly in comparable rows. Center for Retirement Research at Boston College — Public Plans Data, 2024

CalSTRS unfunded liability of $96.29 billion appears in PlainPension alongside market assets $316.92 billion for ratio computations. NYSLRS funded ratio column lists 55.5 percent, reflecting $249.51 billion market assets against $199.84 billion unfunded. These two plans represent California and New York in top rankings from 51 state summaries. New York pension overview joins NYSLRS records to state-level views.

New York State and Local Retirement Systems data in Public Plans Database shows $249.51 billion market assets as third-largest, with unfunded liability $199.84 billion exceeding CalSTRS $96.29 billion. CalSTRS 76.7 percent funded ratio draws from consistent actuarial methods across 4718 records. California and New York state_fips codes enable filtering these plans from 197 total. State Comptroller Reports — Plan-Level Actuarial Valuations, 2024

Top 10 plans range from 91.2 percent funded ratio in Florida to $199.84 billion unfunded liability in New York

Florida Retirement System claims sixth in market assets at $186.36 billion with 91.2 percent funded ratio—the highest among top 10—and $18.01 billion unfunded liability per Public Plans Database. Teacher Retirement System of Texas holds $187.17 billion market assets, 70.3 percent funded ratio, $79.22 billion unfunded liability in fifth place. Washington Department of Retirement Systems lists $144.21 billion market assets, 59.6 percent funded ratio, $97.88 billion unfunded liability, grade D health rating.

New York State Teachers Retirement System records $137.22 billion market assets, 99.9 percent funded ratio—the top funded ratio in top 10—and $0.12 billion unfunded liability. Wisconsin Retirement System shows $127.70 billion market assets, 68.5 percent funded ratio, $58.86 billion unfunded liability. North Carolina Retirement Systems holds $113.88 billion market assets, 75.0 percent funded ratio, $38.03 billion unfunded liability. These join earlier leaders in 197-plan dataset.

Virginia Retirement System completes top 10 at $101.82 billion market assets, 67.5 percent funded ratio, $49.04 billion unfunded liability from Public Plans Database. California's 15 indexed pension plans total $408.79 billion unfunded liabilities, largest state-level burden across 51 US jurisdictions. Plan-year financial records table supports top-10 filtering by market assets column descending. Data methodology details verbatim ingestion from sources.

Florida Retirement System 91.2 percent funded ratio contrasts Washington Department of Retirement Systems 59.6 percent and grade D rating in same dataset. New York State Teachers Retirement System $0.12 billion unfunded liability undercuts peers like Texas $79.22 billion. North Carolina 75.0 percent funded ratio aligns near CalSTRS 76.7 percent across 4718 records. State summaries for Florida, Texas, Washington, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Virginia contextualize these plans.

Public Plans Database top 10 spans California, New York, Texas, Florida, Washington, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Virginia with market assets from $467.05 billion down to $101.82 billion. Funded ratios vary from 99.9 percent to 55.5 percent, unfunded liabilities from $0.12 billion to $199.84 billion. California's $408.79 billion state unfunded total amplifies CalPERS and CalSTRS exposures.

CalPERS $467.05 billion market assets lead the Public Plans Database top 10, where CalSTRS $316.92 billion and NYSLRS $249.51 billion follow, yet funded ratios diverge from 71.3 percent to 76.7 percent and 55.5 percent. Florida Retirement System 91.2 percent and New York State Teachers Retirement System 99.9 percent top funded ratios among these plans, while NYSLRS $199.84 billion unfunded liability and California's $408.79 billion state total expose risks despite asset scale; 4718 plan-year records across 197 plans and 51 states enable full comparisons via PlainPension joins. Data methodology preserves original Public Plans Database fidelity for all metrics.

Comparative jurisdictional notes

Public pension plans tracked in the Public Plans Database are predominantly defined-benefit (DB) single-employer arrangements sponsored by state or local governments, contrasting sharply with the private-sector landscape where defined-contribution (DC) 401(k) and 403(b) plans now dominate worker coverage. Single-employer DB plans like CalPERS, CalSTRS, and NYSLRS pool actuarial risk across one sponsor, whereas multiemployer plans (common in Taft-Hartley industries) spread that risk across multiple contributing employers. Multiple-employer plans split the difference, allowing several unrelated employers to share a plan administrator without joint-liability provisions. National Association of State Retirement Administrators — NASRA Public Fund Survey, 2024

State-sponsored systems differ from federal plans (FERS, CSRS, TSP) in funding mechanics: federal civilian retirement is paid through Treasury appropriations rather than a pre-funded actuarial pool, while state plans must hit annual required contribution (ARC) targets to maintain funded ratios. Among state systems, control-state vs license-state administrative models do not apply to pensions — but parallel jurisdictional carve-outs exist between systems that consolidate teachers, public-safety, and general employees into one trust (e.g. Wisconsin Retirement System) versus systems that segregate by occupation (Texas TRS for teachers, ERS for general employees, separate municipal and county systems). Public Safety Officers' Benefits (PSOB), enhanced multiplier formulas, and earlier normal-retirement-age provisions further differentiate plan tiers within a single sponsor. Center for Retirement Research at Boston College — Public Plans Data, 2024

Cash balance and pension equity hybrid plans occupy a middle ground between traditional DB and DC structures: participants accrue notional account balances credited with pay credits and interest credits, but the plan retains investment risk on the asset side. The Pension Protection Act of 2006 (PPA 2006) clarified hybrid-plan compliance through age-discrimination safe harbors and conversion protections, prompting several state and large municipal plans (notably Kansas, Nebraska, and Tennessee for new hires) to adopt hybrid designs. The Setting Every Community Up for Retirement Enhancement Act (SECURE Act 2019) and SECURE 2.0 Act 2022 introduced auto-enrollment, auto-escalation, and Required Minimum Distribution age changes (73 effective 2023 under SECURE 2.0 §107, transitioning to 75 in 2033) that affect DC plans more than DB plans, but reshape the broader retirement-savings landscape that public pensions sit within.

Compared with private-sector DB plans governed by ERISA Title I (labor) and Title IV (Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation termination insurance), public pensions are explicitly exempt from ERISA under §4(b)(1) — instead operating under state constitutional protections, state pension code, and Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB) reporting standards. GASB Statement 67 (financial reporting for plans) and Statement 68 (employer reporting) require public plans to disclose net pension liability on the sponsor government's balance sheet using a single discount rate that blends expected return and high-quality municipal bond yield when assets are projected insufficient. Private-plan Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) backstop is unavailable to public-plan members; instead, full-faith-and-credit pledges of the sponsoring state or municipality serve as the de facto guarantee, with severity of legal protection varying by state constitutional language (some states explicitly forbid benefit reductions, others permit prospective reform). Government Accounting Standards Board — Statements 67 and 68, 2014

Pension and ERISA reference notes

The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA, Pub. L. 93-406) organizes private-sector retirement law across four titles: Title I (Labor — fiduciary duty under §404(a)(1) prudent-expert standard, reporting and disclosure under Form 5500, prohibited transactions under §406 with statutory exemptions in §408), Title II (Internal Revenue Code amendments — qualified plan tax treatment under §401(a)), Title III (Jurisdiction — DOL Employee Benefits Security Administration enforcement and Treasury IRS enforcement coordination), and Title IV (Plan Termination Insurance — Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation single-employer and multiemployer programs). Public plans are exempt from ERISA per §4(b)(1) but adopt many parallel governance principles voluntarily through state code. Public Law 93-406 — Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974

Form 5500 is the annual report required of nearly all ERISA-covered plans, with attached schedules tailored to plan size and structure: Schedule A (insurance contract information), Schedule B (actuarial information for DB plans, replaced by Schedule MB for multiemployer and Schedule SB for single-employer post-PPA), Schedule C (service-provider compensation disclosure under 408(b)(2)), Schedule D (multi-employer plan information), Schedule G (financial transactions including non-exempt prohibited transactions), Schedule H (large-plan financial statements with Part I asset-allocation breakdown into equity, fixed income, alternatives, real estate, and cash), Schedule I (small-plan financial statements), and Schedule R (retirement plan distributions and ESOP information). Public plans typically file equivalent state-level actuarial valuations rather than Form 5500.

Defined benefit (DB) plans encompass single-employer pensions sponsored by one company, multi-employer plans jointly trusteed under collective bargaining agreements (Taft-Hartley plans), and multiple-employer plans operated by professional employer organizations or association sponsors. Defined contribution (DC) plans include 401(k), 403(b) for nonprofit and educational employers, 457 deferred compensation for state and local government workers, 401(a) money-purchase and profit-sharing plans, ESOPs (Employee Stock Ownership Plans), and target-benefit plans. Since the Pension Protection Act of 2006, automatic-enrollment and automatic-escalation features became the dominant 401(k) design pattern, with the SECURE Act 2019 expanding eligibility for long-term part-time workers and the SECURE 2.0 Act 2022 introducing emergency savings sidecars, student-loan-matching contributions, and the Saver's Match. Internal Revenue Code §§401(a), 401(k), 403(b), 457

Internal Revenue Code §415(b) caps the annual benefit payable from a DB plan at the lesser of 100 percent of the participant's high-three average compensation or a statutory dollar limit (in 2024, $275,000), while §415(c) caps DC annual additions at the lesser of 100 percent of compensation or another statutory dollar limit (in 2024, $69,000 including employer contributions plus catch-up). The §402(g) elective-deferral limit governs employee 401(k) and 403(b) salary deferrals (in 2024, $23,000 base plus $7,500 catch-up at age 50, with the SECURE 2.0 Act adding a super-catch-up of $11,250 for participants ages 60 through 63 starting in 2025). Compensation eligible for plan purposes is itself capped under §401(a)(17) at $345,000 in 2024.

Nondiscrimination testing is the cornerstone of qualified-plan compliance: the Actual Deferral Percentage (ADP) test and Actual Contribution Percentage (ACP) test compare highly compensated employee participation against non-highly compensated employee participation in 401(k) deferrals and matching, with corrective distributions of excess contributions required if a plan fails. The Top-Heavy test under §416 requires minimum benefits or contributions for non-key employees when key employees hold more than 60 percent of plan assets. The §401(a)(4) general nondiscrimination test verifies that benefits or contributions do not discriminate in favor of highly compensated employees, with safe-harbor design (Safe Harbor 401(k) under §401(k)(12) or Qualified Automatic Contribution Arrangement QACA under §401(k)(13)) eliminating ADP/ACP testing in exchange for matching or nonelective contribution commitments. The §410(b) coverage test ensures the plan benefits a sufficient percentage of non-highly compensated employees relative to highly compensated employees. Treasury Regulation §1.401(a)(4) — General Nondiscrimination Rules

Roth 401(k) contributions, after-tax contributions, and the mega-backdoor-Roth strategy enable participants to direct after-tax dollars into qualified plans for tax-free growth. In-service distributions before separation from service are permitted only in narrow circumstances (age 59½ for elective deferrals, age 62 for DB pension benefits under PPA 2006), while hardship withdrawals under §401(k) safe-harbor reasons (medical expenses, primary-residence purchase, post-secondary tuition, eviction or foreclosure prevention, funeral expenses, casualty loss, federally declared disaster, terminal illness under SECURE 2.0) require demonstration of immediate and heavy financial need. Qualified plan loans up to the lesser of $50,000 or 50 percent of vested balance under §72(p) avoid taxable-distribution treatment if repaid on schedule.

Required Minimum Distributions (RMDs) under §401(a)(9) begin at age 73 for participants born 1951-1959 (per SECURE 2.0 §107) and shift to age 75 for those born in 1960 or later effective 2033. The Uniform Lifetime Table calculates the RMD as account balance divided by the life-expectancy factor for the participant's age; the joint-and-last-survivor table applies when the sole beneficiary is a spouse more than ten years younger. RMDs from Roth 401(k) accounts were eliminated by SECURE 2.0 §325 effective 2024, harmonizing them with Roth IRAs. The qualified default investment alternative (QDIA) safe harbor under DOL Reg. §2550.404c-5 protects fiduciaries who default participants who fail to make affirmative investment elections into target-date funds, balanced funds, or managed accounts.

Fiduciary duty under ERISA §404(a)(1) requires plan fiduciaries to act solely in the interest of participants and beneficiaries, with the prudent-expert standard demanding the care, skill, prudence, and diligence that a prudent person familiar with such matters would exercise — a higher bar than the common-law prudent-investor standard. Plan fiduciaries include the named plan administrator under §3(16), trustees under §403, investment managers under §3(38) (registered investment advisers, banks, or qualified insurance companies who acknowledge fiduciary status in writing and gain ERISA §405(d) liability allocation), and §3(21) investment advisors who provide investment recommendations. The 408(b)(2) service-provider fee disclosure rule mandates written disclosure of direct and indirect compensation, while 404(c) participant-directed-investment safe harbor relieves fiduciaries from individual investment-decision liability when participants control their own accounts and receive prescribed disclosures. ERISA §404(a)(1) — Fiduciary Duties

Prohibited transactions under ERISA §406 forbid sales, exchanges, leases, loans, or services between a plan and a party in interest (including the sponsor, fiduciaries, and affiliates), with statutory exemptions in §408 for routine plan operations such as participant loans (§408(b)(1)), reasonable arrangements with service providers (§408(b)(2)), and the QPAM (Qualified Professional Asset Manager) class exemption PTE 84-14 that allows transactions between a plan and a party in interest when an unrelated qualified asset manager directs them. PTE 2020-02 (the DOL fiduciary investment-advice rule) was vacated by the Fifth Circuit in 2024, leaving the 1975 five-part test and the SEC Regulation Best Interest framework as the operative standards for retirement-account investment recommendations.

The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) operates two federal insurance programs for private DB plans: the single-employer program (covering approximately 23 million participants in 24,000 plans) charges a per-participant flat-rate premium plus a variable-rate premium based on unfunded vested benefits, with a Risk-Based Premium structure introduced under MAP-21 (Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act). The multiemployer program covers approximately 11 million participants in 1,400 collectively-bargained plans and historically faced insolvency until the Multiemployer Pension Reform Act 2014 (MPRA) authorized benefit suspensions in critical-and-declining plans, followed by the American Rescue Plan Act 2021 §9704 Special Financial Assistance (SFA) program providing up to $86 billion in PBGC grants to keep insolvent multiemployer plans solvent through 2051. Plan terminations occur in three forms: standard termination (sufficient assets), distress termination (sponsor financial inability), and involuntary termination initiated by PBGC. Public pension plans receive no PBGC backstop. PBGC Annual Report — Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, 2024

Defined-benefit plan funding rules under PPA 2006 require minimum contributions that gradually amortize unfunded liabilities, with benefit restrictions imposed when the Adjusted Funding Target Attainment Percentage (AFTAP) falls below 80 percent (limits on accelerated benefit payments and amendments increasing benefits) or below 60 percent (suspension of future benefit accruals). The MAP-21, HATFA (Highway and Transportation Funding Act 2014), and BBA 2015 (Bipartisan Budget Act 2015) introduced segment-rate stabilization that smoothed corporate-bond-rate movements through a 25-year average corridor — controversial because it artificially reduced contribution requirements while increasing PBGC variable-rate premium revenue. Liability-driven investing (LDI) and asset-liability matching (ALM) frameworks aim to immunize the funded ratio against interest-rate movements by aligning fixed-income duration with liability duration, while glide-path target-date fund design progressively de-risks participant accounts as the target retirement date approaches.

For more on how PlainPension extracts these data points from upstream Public Plans Database releases, see our methodology page. Plan-level rankings, state aggregates, and the underlying historical funded-ratio series are accessible from each plan profile, and corrections can be flagged through the contact form for review in the next refresh cycle.