Default Investments: Made to Stick?
Plan participants stay with some types of vehicles longer than others.
By David Blanchett and Dan Bruns
The Pension Protection Act of 2006 provided safe harbor for three types of qualified default investment alternatives, or QDIAs, in defined-contribution plans: target-date funds, target-risk (or balanced) funds, and managed accounts. Since 2006, target-date funds have emerged as the predominant default choice among plan sponsors. However, there is little research exploring the likelihood of the participants staying in various default investment options. In this article, we explore the demographics associated with default acceptance and which default option appears to be the “stickiest” among defined-contribution participants.
Transparency is how we protect the integrity of our work and keep empowering investors to achieve their goals and dreams. And we have unwavering standards for how we keep that integrity intact, from our research and data to our policies on content and your personal data.
We’d like to share more about how we work and what drives our day-to-day business.
We sell different types of products and services to both investment professionals and individual investors. These products and services are usually sold through license agreements or subscriptions. Our investment management business generates asset-based fees, which are calculated as a percentage of assets under management. We also sell both admissions and sponsorship packages for our investment conferences and advertising on our websites and newsletters.
How we use your information depends on the product and service that you use and your relationship with us. We may use it to:
To learn more about how we handle and protect your data, visit our privacy center.
Maintaining independence and editorial freedom is essential to our mission of empowering investor success. We provide a platform for our authors to report on investments fairly, accurately, and from the investor’s point of view. We also respect individual opinions––they represent the unvarnished thinking of our people and exacting analysis of our research processes. Our authors can publish views that we may or may not agree with, but they show their work, distinguish facts from opinions, and make sure their analysis is clear and in no way misleading or deceptive.
To further protect the integrity of our editorial content, we keep a strict separation between our sales teams and authors to remove any pressure or influence on our analyses and research.
Read our editorial policy to learn more about our process.