Stock Purchase Plans and 401(k)s: Not an Either/Or Proposition

A worker’s commitment to saving for retirement tends to snowball and build on itself, such that access to both a traditional 401(k) and a stock purchase plan drives greater overall savings.

Explaining the thinking behind a newly published Fidelity Investments survey, Mark Haggerty, the firm’s head of stock plan services, says part of the goal of the study was to dispel a longstanding misconception.

Historically, retirement plan industry experts have been concerned that employees who have access to a 401(k) and an employee stock purchase plan (ESPP) are faced with an “either/or” decision, Haggerty says. However, the freshly published Fidelity data demonstrates that when employees have access to both plans, in an integrated environment, combined participation is associated with better retirement savings behaviors and greater overall financial wellness.

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

Fidelity’s findings are based on an analysis of more than 250,000 employees who have access to both a 401(k) and ESPP. The study shows that employees in both plans contribute an average of 12.5% and 6.3% of their salary in their 401(k) and ESPP, respectively, while employees that only participate in their 401(k) contribute an average of 8.8% of their salary.

Notably, the higher contribution rate for employees in both plans is consistent across all income levels, not just among executives or highly paid staff. For example, Fidelity’s data shows, employees with annual salaries between $25,000 and $50,000 who participate in both plans contribute an average of 8.3% and 4.7% to their 401(k) and ESPP, respectively, compared with a 7.4% contribution rate for employees that only participate in their 401(k).

These figures match data published last year by Schwab Stock Plan Services. At the time, Amy Reback, vice president of Schwab Stock Plan Services, told PLANSPONSOR that having a diversified portfolio of both taxed and tax-deferred savings is almost always a good strategy. ESPPs, unlike a traditional 401(k), are generally set up in a way that will result in participants contributing after-tax dollars, potentially reducing their income tax burden down the line. As explained by the publication MyStockOptions.com, plan sponsors can deliver special tax advantages to ESPP participants if the plan is structured to meet the requirements of Internal Revenue Code (IRC) Section 423.

Schwab’s 2019 survey found that, for those with an equity compensation plan, it makes up 27% of their net worth on average. Sixty-eight percent also hold company stock outside of their equity compensation plan, primarily in their 401(k) plan. Sixty-five percent were found to be very or extremely confident their equity compensation plan will help them meet their financial goals, and 28% were somewhat confident.

The fresh Fidelity data shows these dynamics have not changed during the coronavirus pandemic. If anything, they have solidified. Today, Fidelity finds, nearly nine out of 10 (89%) employees that participate in their company’s ESPP also participate in their 401(k), and employees that participate in both plans are more likely to take advantage of financial guidance made available by their employer, which can contribute to improved overall financial wellness.

As Haggerty emphasizes, when participation rates for employees in both their ESPP and 401(k) are analyzed by income, the analysis shows double-digit participation rates at every income level. The research also finds that participation in both plans was consistent among male and female employees.

The Fidelity research shows plan design matters as much for ESPPs as it does for a 401(k) or health care benefit plan. Simply put, an easier enrollment and account management process brings about potentially much higher participation.

One ESPP plan design feature shown to be particularly important is called a “look back” period. While ESPPs often offer workers the chance to purchase company stock at a discount, ranging from 5% to 15% off the regular price, many ESPP plans with a 15% discount also offer a look back period, which can stretch the discount when the stock price is appreciating. In other words, a look back compares the price at the beginning of the offering period to the price at the end of the purchase period and applies the discount to the lower price.

Fidelity’s analysis suggests that ESPPs offering a 15% discount with a look back provision have a participation rate of 44%—well above the participation rates for plans that offer lower discounts or no look back.

“This analysis demonstrates that while it’s important for employers to consider the workplace benefits they make available to their employees, it’s also important to recognize how the benefits are structured and the positive impact of offering employees multiple benefits in an integrated environment,” Haggerty says.

OCIOs Help DC Plan Sponsors With Investment Lineup Best Practices

Plan sponsors using an outsourced chief investment officer have more diversified asset classes and a mix of active and passive investment options in their fund lineups, PGIM research found.

Outsourced chief investment officers (OCIOs) have historically been used by defined benefit (DB) plan sponsors and endowments, but there is a growing trend of defined contribution (DC) plan sponsors turning to OCIO managers, according to PGIM, the global asset management business of Prudential Financial.

PGIM worked with Greenwich Associates to survey 138 DC plan sponsors and with Curcio Webb to survey 20 OCIO managers and found 15% of plan sponsors are using an OCIO manager for their all their 401(k) plan investments. OCIOs are more common among mid-sized plans (24%) than larger plans (8%).

Get more!  Sign up for PLANSPONSOR newsletters.

Plan sponsors’ top reasons for using an OCIO manager were the desire for expertise in implementing institutional-quality structures, the perceived mitigation of fiduciary risk and insufficient investment sophistication. However, OCIOs indicated that the top reasons for being hired by their clients were the perceived mitigation of fiduciary risk and the plan sponsors’ lack of resources, not so much their expertise in implementing institutional-quality structures.

“The move by some plan sponsors to utilize OCIOs seems to be driven, in part, by the desire to implement more best practices,” says Josh Cohen, head of institutional defined contribution at PGIM. “While some sponsors are concerned with the perceived fiduciary risk of implementing a more institutional approach, others want to do so but need help getting there. This includes adding diversified asset classes and having a thoughtful mix of active and passive investment options.”

Plan sponsors that are using an OCIO are less likely than those that are not using one to offer a primarily or entirely passively managed fund lineup and are less likely to use 100% passively managed target-date funds (TDFs), according to the research. Plan sponsors using an OCIO are more likely to offer multi-manager structures for at least some of their menu options and are more likely to say they offer alternative investments in the fund lineup.

“At PGIM, we believe providing DC plan participants access to a more institutional investment approach enhances the ability to meet retirement readiness objectives. Our research indicates that OCIOs who take on fiduciary discretion tend to prefer a more institutional approach than we otherwise tend to see in the market. It also appears that plan sponsors who have hired an OCIO incorporate more of these best practices,” Cohen says. “There continues to be opportunities for OCIOs to provide innovative solutions for plan sponsors to ultimately help their participants meet their retirement income goals.”

The full research report is available at https://www.pgim.com/dc-ocio.

«