Managed Accounts, By the Numbers

PLANSPONSOR’s latest plan sponsor research reveals how managed accounts are being used—or not—on the ground.

This January, managed accounts went business mainstream with an article in The Wall Street Journal declaring that “research suggests the services aren’t always worth the cost.”

In the retirement industry, views vary, but there is little doubt that managed accounts are increasingly in the conversation. Not only have managed account options proliferated in recent years, but fees have come down (a rallying cry for supporters), and, more recently, benchmarking is available to inform plan fiduciaries about accounts they choose to offer.

Want the latest retirement plan adviser news and insights? Sign up for PLANADVISER newsletters.

So how, in practice, are managed accounts being used among plan sponsors?

In a survey of 2,128 plan sponsors released this week by sister publication PLANSPONSOR, managed accounts appear alive and well in retirement plans across the country. More than one-third of sponsors say they are offering managed accounts to their participants, according to the 2024 Defined Contribution Benchmarking Report. Perhaps even more impactful: 16% have them as a default option for automatic deferrals.

Which of the following investment classes/options are available to your plan participants?

Domestic equity funds (i.e., S&P 500, Russell 2000, etc.)
85.9%
Domestic bond funds
82.9%
Target-date funds
82.6%
International equity fund (i.e., Europe/Asia, Global Market, etc.)
81.8%
Balanced funds
53.6%
Money market funds
48.9%
Professionally managed account service (for participants)
37.7%
International bond funds
33.8%
Target-risk funds (i.e., growth, conservative, etc.)
24.7%
Source: 2024 PLANSPONSOR Defined Contribution Benchmarking Report

What is the default investment for automatic enrollment?

Target-date fund (all types)
54.7%
Professionally managed account (participant-level allocation model)
16.2%
Unsure
11.5%
Other
8.8%
Balanced fund
5.4%
Money market fund
2.0%
Risk-based lifestyle fund
0.7%
Stable value fund/GIC
0.7%
Source: 2024 PLANSPONSOR Defined Contribution Benchmarking Report
Although managed accounts are now 20 years old, actual assets within them are still relatively small. Cerulli Associates, which tracks the account assets managed by the top nine DC providers, shows a market of $434.57 billion, as of the second quarter of 2023. As a comparison, the top 10 target-date funds in DC plans accounted for $1.74 trillion in assets at the end of 2023, according to Simfund, which, like PLANADVISER, is owned by ISS STOXX.

Steven Kaczynski, a managing director for fiduciary plan solutions at DBR & Co., says many of the firm’s clients offer a managed account, which the firm advises on and monitors. But Pittsburgh-based DBR & Co. does not generally view them as a default option, in part because the “value proposition” in the solutions available are not as attractive as options available in target-date funds, he says.

Where Kaczynski sees value in managed accounts is for participants who are in that “gray area” between those who would work one-on-one with a registered investment adviser and those who are fine leaving their savings in a TDF. The solution may give some participants “peace of mind,” with the additional fees for the service viewed as a kind of insurance.

“People like insurance even though, often, it’s expensive,” he says. “It helps them sleep at night and helps them generally feel protected.”

In this case, a managed account may feel like insurance from a bad asset allocation for their retirement savings or as if it is saving them from trying to constantly manage their own 401(k) if that is what they are after, Kaczynski says. As of now, however, he sees managed accounts as relatively “expensive insurance,” with participants potentially better off remaining in TDFs.

The Adviser Role

In the DC benchmarking survey, plan sponsors ranked third-party advisement on managed accounts as relatively successful (3.8 out of 5) in terms of providing useful services.

Kaczynski agrees with this notion, particularly if the adviser can help bar any options that may be better at gathering fees than producing the best results of participants.

“I appreciate the adviser role in the process of reviewing and selecting the right managed account service,” he says. “As an adviser, we should not be trying to sell a particular solution. … We see ourselves as someone who can help you review all of the potential solutions on behalf of clients. If managed accounts are something that they are interested in, then we can review the right ones or what’s available through the recordkeeper.”

Which DC plan feature do you believe will have the greatest impact on improving participant outcomes?

Participant education
31.2%
Holistic financial wellness tools
27.0%
1-1 financial planning advice with an adviser
19.1%
In-plan guaranteed income solutions
9.3%
Personalized asset allocation through managed accounts
7.9%
Default investment or QDIA fund performance
5.6%
Source: 2024 PLANSPONSOR Defined Contribution Benchmarking Report

Kaczynski notes that recordkeepers will often put forward a managed account offering that they provide with a fee concession. He said, like any offering, it can be reviewed by an adviser on its merits, but there should be caution about a product being pushed due to revenue incentives.

In many cases, he says, a lower-fee target-date fund will serve the needs of participants, and when adjustments are requested or needed, that can be done through choosing a different TDF or using a customized model.

“Target-date funds almost feel underrated at this point,” Kaczynski says. “Target-date funds as the qualified default alternative solve for a lot of the issues with engagement and providing information and just generally make sure there is appropriate asset allocation.”

At DBR & Co., Kaczynski says the firm also offers its own risk-based models to participants who do not want to use the default option. He says DBR & Co.’s models can often provide a low-cost, personalized option that does not require a managed account. The offer is not revenue-generating for the advisory, he says, but the funds are already being selected and managed, so it is relatively easy to offer as part of a plan service model.

Finally, when it comes to participant advice, Kaczynski says the firm has noted a curious thing of late: Participants want to speak with a knowledgeable human.

“What we’re seeing more and more is that people just want to talk to a person,” he says. “We’ll provide education, what we call office hours, and that seems to be the most satisfying for everyone all around. They often might leave the conversation just sticking in the target-date [fund] they were already in, but just feeling a lot better about it.”

Which of the following third-party services/support are or would be most valuable to you in your role as a retirement plan sponsor on a scale of 1 least to 5 most?

Provide cybersecurity guidance on participant data protection
3.8
Help select/monitor managed account services
3.4
Develop/evaluate student loan repayment programs
2.2
Develop the investment menu option in our Health Savings Account (HSA)
2.0
Select a Health Savings Account (HSA) provider
1.8
Source: 2024 PLANSPONSOR Defined Contribution Benchmarking Report

Leading Teams Starts With Mindset Shift

Many advisers rise through the ranks due to success with clients, but leading often takes other skills, writes a Hartford Funds VP of applied insights.

In any industry, the role of team leader is a significant one, typically responsible for the success of both the business and the people. For many financial professional teams, the leader is often the person with the longest tenure and is most likely the rainmaker. They are well respected from a sales standpoint and historically have focused their time on prospecting and meeting with clients. In the case of 401(k) plan advisers, that can often mean longstanding relationships with plan sponsors that oversee hundreds of millions in assets.

Many of these team leaders assumed the role at a point in time when it made sense, possibly when the team was smaller, the business was less complex and there were fewer moving parts to manage. They may or may not have proactively taken on the role, but at some point, “manager” or “leader” became part of their title—and it stayed. Their passion, most likely, has remained with the clients and the asset-gathering, but they have dutifully assumed the management role because it was expected of them.

Never miss a story — sign up for PLANADVISER newsletters to keep up on the latest retirement plan adviser news.

The leader’s role is ever-changing, and as teams take on new responsibilities, so too does leadership. With growing client expectations, the influx of innovative technologies and the challenge of attracting and retaining talent, it may be time to reassess whether the current lead is best equipped to manage the demands financial professional teams face today. Doing so may break tradition, but it is critical in supporting any growth-oriented team.

From Financial Professional to Leader

Julie Genjac

To perform as well as possible, a financial professional team needs one person dedicated to running the business, establishing goals, setting objectives, overseeing operations and navigating associated challenges. The mindset needed in this position is not necessarily the same as a sales or client engagement role and requires more strategic thinking around business operations, culture and how success is measured—and celebrated. A strong leader also needs a certain level of poise to work through human-to-human frustrations.

This is not a part-time job. Leadership tasks must be prioritized day in and day out to keep the team running seamlessly. It is crucial that each team establish who the leader is and how that individual transitions from their previous experience as a practitioner in sales and client engagement.

One way a salesperson can disengage from an old role and become a leader is through delegation, which requires practice and getting in the habit of asking, “What’s the best use of my time?” when approaching asks. Eventually, enough delegation will require a new set of written rules and responsibilities for each team member so the group is performing at its highest level while using each person’s time most effectively. Alternatively, finding the right person to do the job might mean bringing on a new hire whose sole focus is being the team leader.

Leading Humans, Not Employees

Without a dedicated leader, there can be confusion about priorities, goals and accountability. Sales and business metrics may be strong, but the people-centric components of the team, such as culture, communication and establishment of roles and responsibilities, may be lacking. I always say that we hire employees, and “humans” walk through the door. Someone needs to oversee the humans on the team, and those humans need much more than numeric goals and spreadsheets. They need to be inspired, nurtured and challenged (key word: consistently). Team culture is one of those intangibles that is difficult to define but feels excellent when it’s humming.

Achieving a great team culture requires ongoing communication, planning, documentation and patience, plus much trial and error to really get it right. It does not involve sweeping issues under the proverbial carpet and hoping they fix themselves. Checking in on metrics and goals is very different than providing coaching and feedback on performance, growth and career trajectory, but both are key components of team-building. Just like it is one skill set to present a financial plan to a client, it is a completely different skill set to navigate job performance-related issues or lend a shoulder to cry on when someone on the team is navigating a personal issue. 

Introducing the COO

Another way to think about this leadership role is through the lens of a chief operating officer. Like a COO, your team leader should oversee daily operations—the staff and the processes—and be responsible for the smooth functioning of all systems. The COO interfaces between the financial professionals and the support team and ensures all parties are aligned.

You may have someone on your team who can step into this “COO” role, or you may want to search for an external hire. Remember that you do not necessarily need someone with significant industry experience, but you do need a professional with a high level of emotional intelligence. The leader needs to be able to read the room, motivate others and have candid—and sometimes difficult—conversations.

Planning Today for Tomorrow’s Success

Entering a new year is an ideal time to ask, “How would I grade my team’s leadership process?” and “Is there an opportunity to proactively enhance it this year?” Is your leadership structure built on past tradition, or have you selected someone who can really focus on the role and nurture the humans on your team to be outstanding performers, to collaborate, communicate and integrate?

If the answer is anything other than, “Yes,” it may be time to reassess the organizational chart.

 

«