Executive Summary
US public pension funds are the most accessible large pool of private-equity capital. The biggest sovereign and national plans abroad are larger (Japan's GPIF alone runs well over a trillion dollars), but US public plans report their assets, their allocations, and their manager commitments in public filings, which makes them the practical starting point for almost any institutional raise.
CalPERS is the largest, at $563.0 billion as of June 30, 2025. CalSTRS is second at $370.2 billion. Behind them sit the New York State and New York City systems, Texas, and Florida, each above $200 billion. Below the top tier, dozens of state plans each manage $70 billion to $185 billion, and most of them run dedicated private-equity programs.
How these plans allocate matters to fundraising as much as how much they hold. US public pensions put about 13.8 percent of assets into private equity on average, according to the Public Plans Database. A plan with $150 billion and a low-teens PE target is carrying somewhere around $20 billion in private equity, and it has to keep committing to new funds as older ones wind down. That creates steady, recurring demand for new commitments that most other LP types cannot match.
Every figure in the table below is the fund's audited fiduciary net position, taken from its own most recent ACFR or audited financial statements. Figures are total pension-trust net position; where a system reports its assets bundled with separate health-care, OPEB, or deferred-compensation programs, the pension component is used. Fiscal-year ends differ, so the as-of date is shown for each fund.
The Largest US Public Pension Funds by Net Position
| # | Pension Fund | Net Position | As Of | State |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | CalPERS | $563.0 billion | Jun 30, 2025 | California |
| 2 | CalSTRS | $370.2 billion | Jun 30, 2025 | California |
| 3 | New York State Common Retirement Fund | $273.1 billion | Mar 31, 2025 | New York |
| 4 | New York City Retirement Systems (QPP) | $261.2 billion | Jun 30, 2025 | New York |
| 5 | Teacher Retirement System of Texas | $226.3 billion | Aug 31, 2025 | Texas |
| 6 | Florida Retirement System (FRS) | $212.6 billion | Jun 30, 2025 | Florida |
| 7 | Washington State pension funds (WSIB) | $181.8 billion | Jun 30, 2025 | Washington |
| 8 | New York State Teachers (NYSTRS) | $154.2 billion | Jun 30, 2025 | New York |
| 9 | Wisconsin Retirement System (SWIB) | $139.4 billion | Dec 31, 2024 | Wisconsin |
| 10 | North Carolina Retirement Systems | $135.8 billion | Jun 30, 2024 | North Carolina |
| 11 | Teachers Retirement System of Georgia | $116.8 billion | Jun 30, 2025 | Georgia |
| 12 | Massachusetts PRIM (PRIT Fund) | $115.5 billion | Jun 30, 2025 | Massachusetts |
| 13 | Virginia Retirement System | $105.9 billion | Jun 30, 2025 | Virginia |
| 14 | Ohio Public Employees (OPERS) | $105.4 billion | Dec 31, 2024 | Ohio |
| 15 | Minnesota State Board of Investment | $101.2 billion | Jun 30, 2025 | Minnesota |
| 16 | STRS Ohio | $92.7 billion | Jun 30, 2025 | Ohio |
| 17 | Oregon PERF (OPERF) | $88.6 billion | Jun 30, 2025 | Oregon |
| 18 | New Jersey Pension Fund | $84.1 billion | Jun 30, 2025 | New Jersey |
| 19 | Pennsylvania PSERS | $82.6 billion | Jun 30, 2025 | Pennsylvania |
| 20 | Michigan Public School Employees (MPSERS) | $78.7 billion | Sep 30, 2025 | Michigan |
| 21 | Maryland State Retirement | $73.2 billion | Jun 30, 2025 | Maryland |
Why These Funds Anchor Private Equity Fundraising
A private-equity fund is built on a small number of large commitments. The first close depends on anchor investors who write checks big enough to give the fund credibility, and US public pensions are the most reliable source of those checks. A single large plan can commit several hundred million dollars to one fund, and a working relationship can carry a GP across multiple fund vintages over a decade.
Three things about pension capital shape how a raise actually goes:
Allocation target. Whatever a plan's target, it has to keep deploying into new funds as older ones return capital, so the demand for fresh commitments is steady and structural, not opportunistic.
Existing manager roster. Pensions do not spread capital across hundreds of GPs. They re-up with managers they already know and add a few new relationships a year, usually after long diligence and a consultant's recommendation. The relationship has to exist before the raise, not during it.
Board and pacing calendar. Commitments move through investment committees, board meetings, and annual pacing plans. The window to be considered for a given vintage is narrow and scheduled, so knowing where a plan sits in its cycle matters as much as the pitch.
Why US Plans, Specifically
The largest pension funds in the world are outside the US. Japan's GPIF, Korea's National Pension Service, the big Dutch and Canadian plans all run more money than CalPERS. They are also harder to reach and, in the Canadian case, often invest directly and co-invest rather than backing third-party funds.
US public plans are the opposite. There are dozens of them above $50 billion, they publish their pacing plans and recent commitments, and their consultant relationships are a matter of public record. A GP can see which funds a plan has already backed, where it is over- or under-allocated, and roughly when its next allocation window opens. That public record is exactly what this ranking is drawn from.
How GPs Actually Engage Pension LPs
The work is mostly calendar and consultant mapping, not pitching. Commitments are screened by investment consultants and gatekeepers before a manager reaches the board. Many plans post their pacing plans and recent commitments, so a GP can map which strategies a plan is short on and time an approach to the cycle.
Most firms send a fund to every LP with capital and hope something lands. A targeted raise works the handful of plans whose mandate, pacing, and current portfolio actually fit, built from the same public disclosure record the table above is drawn from.
For the full institutional universe, including endowments, foundations, insurers, and family offices alongside these plans, see the investor directory. For how a primary-source raise is run, see fundraising and capital formation.
Sources & Methodology
Each figure is the fund's audited fiduciary net position from its most recent ACFR or audited financial statements. Figures are pension-trust net position; where a system bundles separate health-care, OPEB, or deferred-compensation/TDA programs, the pension component is used (for example, the New York City figure is the Qualifying Pension Plan and excludes the separate TDA programs, and the Ohio OPERS figure excludes deferred compensation and health care). Investment-board pools (Washington's WSIB, Wisconsin's SWIB, Florida's SBA, Minnesota's SBI, New York's Common Retirement Fund) are shown as the pension assets they manage; the Wisconsin figure is net investment position, not the gross figure that includes leverage. All figures are US dollars, so no currency conversion is involved. Fiscal-year ends differ by fund, which is why the as-of date is shown for each.
Primary sources: CalPERS FY2025 ACFR, CalSTRS FY2025 PAFR/ACFR, NY State Common FY2025 financial statements, NYC FY2025 ACFR, Florida FRS FY2024-25 ACFR, Texas TRS FY2025 ACFR, Washington WSIB 2025 annual report, NYSTRS FY2025 report, Wisconsin SWIB 2024 audit (LAB 25-10), North Carolina FY2024 ACFR, Georgia TRS 2025 ACFR, Virginia VRS FY2025 report, Ohio OPERS 2024 report, Massachusetts PRIT FY2025 ACFR, STRS Ohio FY2025 ACFR, Minnesota SBI 2025 annual report, Oregon PERS FY2025 ACFR, Michigan MPSERS FY2025 ACFR, New Jersey Division of Investment FY2025 report, Pennsylvania PSERS FY2025 ACFR, Maryland MSRPS FY2025 ACFR. Average private-equity allocation from the Public Plans Database.