New Investor Center - This content requires the free Adobe Flash player.

MSN Money video

Video on MSN Money
This video player requires the installation of the free Adobe Flash Player
More video on MSN Money
Dunce © Design Pics, Comstock Select/Corbis

Mutual Funds11/3/2009 12:01 AM ET

Are amateurs running your 401k?

At most companies, the folks who set fees, pick funds and oversee money managers aren't required to have investment training or expertise.

By SmartMoney

Dan Klein runs the 401k plan at a small New Jersey hazardous-materials company, so when it comes to investing advice, he's the go-to guy for his co-workers. Ask for help, and he'll explain the difference between stocks and bonds, value and growth. He might even suggest a portfolio. It's fun, Klein says, adding, "I probably should have been a financial planner."

Maybe so, but there's just one thing: He's not one.

Klein does have a midcareer MBA, but he went to school for chemical engineering and spent much of his working life cleaning up toxic spills. Nine years ago, he traded up to the brickyard view from the vice president's office. One of his first initiatives was to start a 401k plan for the company's 26 employees, and he aggressively encouraged everyone to sign up.

"I only wish someone had done it for me," Klein says.

Now he's in charge of not only the company's financial operations but also his colleagues' retirement security -- a far cry from his days in a hazmat suit.

With the economy and the markets showing tentative signs of a rebound, millions of Americans are focusing on their 401k plans with fingers crossed, hoping to make up the estimated $3.7 trillion that employee retirement accounts lost during the crash. But at all except the biggest companies, the men and women watching over those funds need no special qualifications, no investing expertise and no investment experience.

In practice, the job often falls to the company president, a human-resources manager or a committee of employees -- in other words, people who are experts at something else. At one $54 million construction company in Idaho, the company's founder runs the plan. His main qualification? Four decades in construction.

Ultimately, these people have authority over which funds will be offered, what fees employees will pay and how much education and advice workers will get. "Your performance depends on the decisions they make," says Mike Alfred, the CEO of BrightScope, a California company that rates 401k plans.

Of course, few managers are truly flying solo. Nearly all hire brokers or consultants to suggest funds and make sure their plans comply with the law. Some administrators devote long hours and take courses to bone up.

But critics say that retirement planning has become too complex to be left to amateurs and that even hired help needs oversight. Brokers, for example, are not legally required to pick funds with low fees, so 401k plan managers who sign off on pricey funds could cost their workers tens of thousands of dollars over the long haul.

"They're trying to do the right thing," says Teresa Ghilarducci, the director of the Schwartz Center for Economic Policy Analysis at New York City's New School. "But they're not as competent as investment advisers."

Video: How to save for retirement

This arrangement has come under periodic attack, and it's facing another wave of criticism now as baby boomers struggle to recoup lost savings and Washington buzzes about reforms. But with 465,000 managers out there running 401k plans -- under virtually no regulatory supervision -- no solution will be easy. And given that large companies usually hire in-house experts to run their plans, the ad hoc nature of smaller companies' plans can get overlooked in policy debates.

So for the moment, workers at companies with fewer than 1,000 employees, which account for more than 90% of the nation's labor force, must count on the resourcefulness of whoever happens to be running their plans.

Become a fan of MSN Money on Facebook

To get a rare ground-level look at the folks in charge of so many people's nest eggs, SmartMoney tracked down a few of these managers, including the owner of an RV dealership already dealing with layoffs and a group of physicians with their own theories about investing.

Continued: Manager by committee

 1 | 2 | 3 | next >

Rate this Article

Click on one of the stars below to rate this article from 1 (lowest) to 5 (highest). LowRate it 1Rate it 2Rate it 3Rate it 4Rate it 5High

Glossary Search

Need answers fast? Find definitions for investing or financial terms.

Feature requires Adobe Flash Player
SmartMoney.com
Fund data provided by Morningstar, Inc. © 2009. All rights reserved.
StockScouter data provided by Gradient Analytics, Inc.
Quotes supplied by Interactive Data.
MSN Money's editorial goal is to provide a forum for personal finance and investment ideas. Our articles, columns, message board posts and other features should not be construed as investment advice, nor does their appearance imply an endorsement by Microsoft of any specific security or trading strategy. An investor's best course of action must be based on individual circumstances.
Join the discussion!
Sort by:
1 - 10 of 24
Tuesday, November 03, 2009 6:43:58 AM
Cause they are too busy using R&D money on junkets, bonuses and private jets. 
Tuesday, November 03, 2009 7:36:59 AM

So the article is supposed to be about "amateurs" managing a 401k plan. I thought it was going to be about the VP picking the funds, but instead it's about employers picking...bad brokers. Who's the amateur here? The point is there are very few "advisors" who have anything but their own interest at heart. Other than true "fee only" advisors, every one of them makes a living, for better or worse, based on what they can get you to do. Why is it a broker/"advisor" will NEVER tell their clients to move into cash? Because they'll go broke! They get no commissions / trailers on a money market fund. Sure, most want them want you to do well so you'll refer clients to them, not leave, etc., but their main goal is to MAKE MONEY. One of best friends is an Edward Jones employee; I have some money with him, but only because he's a friend. What mutual funds? All American Funds. Why? Because they're the best? No, of course not. Because EJ has an agreement with them. Stock picks? For $50-$100 a trade I get stocks no better than I can buy in my Schwab account for $10 after reading MSN's investor page.

The author can rag on employers all he wants, but when congress writes laws with dire penalties for screwing up and so you're forced to use some broker so you have some "protection", you're screwed either way.

Tuesday, November 03, 2009 10:55:31 AM

Refreshing to see that there is finally more awareness regarding 401k's. What is needed is legislation that allows for employees to

opt out their 401k plans into a self directed IRA. All investment options would be available and the individual can seek personal

advise should they need to. The concept of assuming responsibility

for one's own retirement has been shifting to the employee at an accelerated pace, but the tools needed are not available when

they are handcuffed to their  401k!

Tuesday, November 03, 2009 11:57:19 AM

I am sure brokers would love nothing more than a law that forces people into self directed plans.  Then they would have direct access to churn accounts with calls to these individuals to convince them to follow the latest trend line (and generate yet another commission for themselves). 

 

Most people are too ignorant to manage their own checkbook, let alone select and manage a portfolio of investments.  Done right, the 401k gives the average employees access to the same retirement savings pool that the executives are using.  Most 401k plans at least limit the amount of research necessary to make investment decisions by paring down the pool of available investments. 

Tuesday, November 03, 2009 12:33:49 PM
I would much prefer a person with 40 years experience running a company to oversee my retirement fund. He would surely care more and know more about prudent fiscal integrity and expenses than would a typical 25 year-old fund manager. I would go so far as to say that if you replaced all fund managers on Wall Street with men who have run their own company, any company,  for 40 years, all things would improve greatly for everyone except the WS fat cats. High time.
Tuesday, November 03, 2009 1:48:02 PM

My oh my, DAggies,

 

You do assume we are all idiots.

 

I believe it's the guys running the mutual funds who are screwing everybody. For the most part, their "goal" for success is to beat the so-called averages (usually S&P).  That means if one of these guys is down 30% NAV while the S&P is down 40%, he is a SUCCESS. Where I come from, if you are 10% or 90% underwater, you are still drowning.

 

Don't know about the rest of you, but my goal is to win, not lose less than the next guy. The only way to do that is to manage your own portfolio. And do the reading and self education required.

 

As for brokers, online brokers rarely call. And hanging up on them is easy enough.

Tuesday, November 03, 2009 3:38:33 PM
Everyone needs to be responsible for themselves. companies do not care what they offer employees as long as the bottom line cost to them is little or nothing,
Tuesday, November 03, 2009 4:13:48 PM
they've been talking us into 401 k's for years so they can slowly steal it away.
Tuesday, November 03, 2009 5:00:05 PM

My current company offers a brokerage link account where you can transfer money from your 401K to a brokerage account linked to it.

 

I have filled out all the necessary paperwork and can pull the trigger anytime I want to, but I'm putting all of my 401K money into a fund I can't get on my own - the Pimco Institutional Total Return Bond fund.

 

The rest of the funds are mediocre at best, so if the bond fund wasn't there, I'd be using the brokerage link account.

 

I think that the simplest way to reform the system would be to require all 401K funds to have a brokerage link to a low-cost brokerage.

#10
Thursday, November 05, 2009 8:27:21 AM

I worked at a National Lab in the 1980's and was there when investing in stocks, bonds and 401K's were first peddled as a way to build a nest egg for retirement.  The presentations by the investment representatives clearly showed that these people were more interested in getting rich than in our welfare as investors.

    I invested but knew not to be influenced by foolish, emotional decision making disguised as professionalism and find these methods of communicating as offensive today as I did then.

    I chose other methods of insuring that my retirement would be secure, satisfying and have the flexibility to spend time with my children, travel and spend time tutoring other people how to be self-reliant while making enough money to take care of themselves and there children.

   I am now at the point where I have developed almost every skill that allows me not to need to hire anyone to provide me with any service and I did this in the amount of time that most people spend watching television every week.

    Don't play the investment and credit rating game in order to afford to buy all of those things that just end up in a land fill and don't have any practical or useful value and you will be amazed at how much time and money you have to design, build and use those things that you have created out of so few materials while consuming so little energy with a waste stream which is almost nonexistent.

   Our way of life as defined and envisioned by intellectuals and professionals is turning into a cruel and heartbreaking experience as we see the results of an economic system which is so flawed and so corrupt that millions of people have lost there jobs and homes and left without the skills to even know how to take care of themselves while other people can live in houses and drive cars that are worth millions but do not have the intelligence to know that everyone looses when we can not even relate to or understand the basic needs of those people around us.

1 - 10 of 24
To add a comment, pleasesign in