CLIENT ACCOUNTS

Recently Viewed Accounts

You have no recently viewed accounts.

Select your location

Who are you ?

Select another location

Wer bist du ?

Wählen Sie einen anderen Ort

Qui êtes vous ?

Sélectionnez un autre emplacement

Qui êtes vous ?

Sélectionnez un autre emplacement

Qui êtes vous ?

Sélectionnez un autre emplacement

Wer bist du ?

Wählen Sie einen anderen Ort

Wer bist du ?

Wählen Sie einen anderen Ort

Qui êtes vous ?

Sélectionnez un autre emplacement

Wer bist du ?

Wählen Sie einen anderen Ort

Qui êtes vous ?

Sélectionnez un autre emplacement

Who are you ?

Select another location

Who are you ?

RETIREMENT PLAN INVESTOR

Use your plan ID (available on your account statement) to determine which employer-sponsored retirement plan website to use:

IF YOUR PLAN ID BEGINS WITH IRK, BRK, 1 OR 2

Visit americanfunds.com/retire

IF YOUR PLAN ID BEGINS WITH 34 OR 135

Visit myretirement.americanfunds.com

Categories
Menu Design
Navigate the changing 401(k) litigation landscape
Jonathan Young
Senior National Accounts Manager

401(k) lawsuits are nothing new, but their numbers have been on the rise. A record number of suits were filed in 2020, more than double the amount filed in 2018 and an 80% increase over 2019, according to Groom Law.


The initial upsurge in lawsuits from more than a decade ago was focused primarily on conflicts of interest and excessive participant fees. Recent lawsuits have homed in on investment results, and two trends have emerged:
 

  • Passive funds — even with lower fees and less management discretion — are being targeted.
  • Poor investment results are being invoked more frequently as a barometer of whether the fiduciary due diligence process was sufficient.

Passive funds do not get a free pass


The recent legal challenges have upended the strategies of many plan sponsors to fill up plan menus with passive index funds in the belief they are lower cost and less likely to be challenged from a fiduciary perspective.


But the truth is, passive funds have not been exempted from these challenges. Consider the following lawsuits against 401(k) plans that used passive investments:


This image is a table showing the outcomes of two notable lawsuits against 401(k) plans that used passive investments. Anthem reached a $23.65 million settlement (see asterisk footnote) in a lawsuit that claimed: Lower cost share classes and vehicles were available for the same investments and the plan could have saved two bps by switching to a cheaper S&P 500 Index fund. Philips North America reached a $17 million settlement (see dagger footnote) in a lawsuit that claimed: Lower cost versions of passive funds were available, including collective investment trusts (CITs) and separately managed accounts, and the firm retained a poorly performing money market fund as the sole capital preservation option.

These cases are consistent with what Groom Law Group, a firm specializing in ERISA law, had earlier concluded in a paper commissioned for Capital Group: that passive strategies do not reduce fiduciary liability.


Ironically, active funds may be less vulnerable to a fee challenge. With an active fund, a plan sponsor can argue that the higher fees are justified because they can potentially offer better risk-adjusted results.


Investment results in the spotlight


Fee-related litigation may have formerly dominated the headlines, but recent settlements involving two of the largest retail employers have pivoted on results, not fees. Walgreens reached a $13.75 million settlement in a lawsuit that accused the plan of selecting passive target date funds that were “chronic poor performers.” Lowe's reached a $12.5 million partial settlement in a lawsuit that accused the company of investing $1 billion in plan assets in an underperforming and unpopular growth fund.§


These lawsuits and subsequent settlements make it clear that plaintiff attorneys have raised the bar on what plan sponsors need to do to get their participants the best investment results possible.


Better results generate better outcomes


This may be a welcome development, as strong investment results can meaningfully improve participant outcomes. Consider the hypothetical scenario below. Early in a participant’s career, at age 25 in the example, 94% of their account balance comes from contributions. Fast forward to the traditional retirement age of 65 and roughly 70% of total wealth can come from investment returns while just 30% is from contributions. Boosting results on that 70% can meaningfully move the needle for retirement readiness, demonstrating the compounding value money creates while making money.


Returns matter more than you think

The demographic assumptions, returns and ending balances are hypothetical and provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide any assurance or promise of actual outcomes. Returns will be affected by the management of the investments and any adjustments to the assumed contribution rates, salary or other participant demographic information. Actual results may be higher or lower than those shown. Past results are not predictive of results in future periods. Based on an exhibit by CBS Moneywatch. Assumptions for 70/30 rule of thumb: This hypothetical example assumes you start investing 10% of your $40,000 income at age 25. And then you continue to contribute 10% each year throughout your career, as your salary increases 3% per year.

That’s why investment selection might be the most important decision plan sponsors make. Even small increases in returns can dramatically improve outcomes, adding years of retirement spending.


Three metrics for long-term investment success


As a retirement plan professional, you have a unique opportunity to help plan sponsors identify the right investments to pursue dignified retirements for participants. While no metric can predict results for any fund or manager, consider these three metrics when looking for funds that have generally been associated with stronger equity results over the long run (especially with active funds):
 

  • Low expenses: Some active managers may not be able to justify their expenses compared to passive peers. It might be worth looking into those that can.
  • Manager ownership: Fund managers’ interests may be better aligned with a participant’s when they invest in their own funds, as both then share in a fund’s potential risk and reward.

Enhance the manager selection process


While the pace of 401(k) lawsuits shows no signs of slowing down, the best way to manage 401(k) litigation is to avoid being sued in the first place. And while a prudent process is essential, it may not be enough when investment results are now being targeted along with fees.


These screening factors above may enhance the manager selection process, which in turn could help plan sponsors select investments that may have the potential to deliver the best long-term investment outcomes to their participants. And better participant outcomes, at the end of the day, is the noble quest all of us in this industry share. 



Jonathan Young is a senior national accounts manager with 31 years of investment industry experience (as of 12/31/2020). He holds a Bachelor’s degree in speech communication from Old Dominion University and he holds the Professional Plan Consultant® designation.


*Rebecca Moore, “Details of Settlement of Anthem Fee Suit Revealed,” April 9, 2019, and "Parties Reach Settlement Agreement in Anthem 401(k) Excessive Fee Case," PlanSponsor, February 22, 2019.
Greg Iacurci, "Philips North America reaches $17 million settlement in 401(k) lawsuit," Retirement Plan Adviser, May 15, 2018, and Rebecca Moore, "Settlement Reached in Excessive Fee Suit One Day After Lawsuit Is Filed," PlanSponsor, May 14, 2018.
Rob Kozlowski, “Settlement agreement reached in ERISA lawsuit against Walgreens,” Pensions&Investments, October 26, 2021, and Brown-Davis et al. v. Walgreen Co. et al. - 1:19-cv-05392 (2019). https://www.classaction.org/news/class-action-claims-walgreens-retirement-plan-shorted-employees-300-million.
§Amanda Umpierrez, “Lowe’s Reaches Settlement in 401(k) ERISA Case,” Planadviser, June 1, 2021.
 

Never miss an industry-leading insight

The Capital Ideas newsletter delivers weekly investment insights straight to your inbox.

Investments are not FDIC-insured, nor are they deposits of or guaranteed by a bank or any other entity, so they may lose value.

Investors should carefully consider investment objectives, risks, charges and expenses. This and other important information is contained in the fund prospectuses and summary prospectuses, which can be obtained from a financial professional and should be read carefully before investing.

Statements attributed to an individual represent the opinions of that individual as of the date published and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Capital Group or its affiliates. This information is intended to highlight issues and should not be considered advice, an endorsement or a recommendation.

All Capital Group trademarks mentioned are owned by The Capital Group Companies, Inc., an affiliated company or fund. All other company and product names mentioned are the property of their respective companies.

Use of this website is intended for U.S. residents only.

American Funds Distributors, Inc., member FINRA.

This content, developed by Capital Group, home of American Funds, should not be used as a primary basis for investment decisions and is not intended to serve as impartial investment or fiduciary advice.