The Markets August 7, 2018

U.S. Equities Boost Institutional Investor Returns in Q2 2018

Second quarter rebounded slightly from last quarter, which posted negative median returns for all plans for the first time in nearly three years, according to Wilshire TUCS.

Reported by

Institutional assets tracked by Wilshire Trust Universe Comparison Service (Wilshire TUCS) posted an all-plan median return of 0.88% for second quarter and 7.50% for the year ending June 30.

Second quarter rebounded slightly from last quarter, which posted negative median returns for all plans for the first time in nearly three years.

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

Public funds posted the best quarterly and one-year returns, 1.34% and 8.55%, respectively, of all plan types, while corporate funds posted the lowest, 0.42% and 5.52%, respectively. Foundations and endowments posted quarterly and one-year returns of 1.06% and 7.71%, respectively. Returns for Taft Hartley defined benefit (DB) plans were 0.72% and 7.96%, respectively, and for Taft Hartley health and welfare funds were 1.23% and 5.98%, respectively.

“Exposure to U.S equities clearly helped fuel plan performance second quarter,” says Jason Schwarz, president, Wilshire Analytics and Wilshire Funds Management.  “The recent mix of positive economic indicators and generally strong earnings results has helped drive equity returns higher.”

U.S. equities, represented by the Wilshire 5000 Total Market Index, gained 3.83% second quarter and posted a 14.66% gain for the June 30 one-year. Meanwhile, international equities, represented by the MSCI AC World ex U.S., fell -2.61% second quarter with a net gain of 7.28% for the year. U.S. bonds, as represented by the Wilshire Bond Index, also fell second quarter, posting -0.25% and -0.59% for the quarter and year, respectively.

Quarterly median returns across plan types ranged from 0.26% to 1.56% for large corporate funds (assets greater than $1 billion) and large foundations and endowments (assets greater than $500 million), respectively. One-year returns spanned low and high medians from the same, ranging from 4.64% to 10.03% for large corporate funds and large foundations and endowments, respectively.

“The 60/40 portfolio outperformed all plan types, posting a 2.20% gain for the quarter,” says Schwarz. “While all plans types fell short of the quarter’s 1.8% target needed for a 7.5% annual return, medians were positive across the board due mostly to U.S. equity exposure.”
Compliance August 7, 2018

Wells Fargo Gets Dismissal of Proprietary TDF Suit Affirmed

The 8th Circuit ruled that the plaintiff failed to allege sufficient facts to demonstrate that the Wells Fargo TDFs were an imprudent choice.

Reported by

A federal appellate court has affirmed dismissal of a lawsuit against Wells Fargo alleging that it engaged in self-dealing and imprudent investing of its own 401(k) plan’s assets by funneling billions of dollars of those assets into Wells Fargo’s proprietary target-date funds (TDFs).

John Meiners filed the lawsuit last November, also accusing Wells Fargo of using a quick enroll option which defaulted participants into the TDFs to seed the funds and make more money.

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

The appellate court agreed with U.S. District Court Judge David S. Doty of the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota agreed with Wells Fargo that Meiners’ allegations that the bank breached its fiduciary duty by continuing to invest in its own TDFs when better-performing funds were available at a lower cost are insufficient to plausibly allege a breach of fiduciary duty. Specifically, the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said Meiners did not plead facts showing that the Wells Fargo TDFs were underperforming funds. “He only pled that one Vanguard fund, which he alleged was comparable, performed better than the Wells Fargo TDFs. The fact that one fund with a different investment strategy ultimately performed better does not establish anything about whether the Wells Fargo TDFs were an imprudent choice at the outset,” the appellate court wrote in its opinion.

The 8th Circuit said it is also unpersuaded by Meiner’s argument that the Wells Fargo TDFs were too expensive due to their fees. The appellate court cited Braden v. Wal-Mart Stores in which the court found that different shares of the same fund were a meaningful benchmark, but the appellate court said Meiners does not match that benchmark by alleging that cheaper alternative investments with some similarities exist in the marketplace. “Such an expansion of Braden is inappropriate because it permits plaintiffs to dodge the requirement for a meaningful benchmark by merely finding a less expensive alternative fund or two with some similarity,” the appellate court said.

The 8th Circuit ruled that Meiners failed to allege sufficient facts to demonstrate that the Wells Fargo TDFs were an imprudent choice. It also said it cannot reasonably infer it acted out of a motive to seed underperforming or inordinately expensive funds by making the TDFs the plan’s default investment if Meiners has not plausibly alleged that those funds were, in fact, underperforming or inordinately expensive.

«