PCI’s 401(k) Investment Lineup vs. Passive Scorecard Annual Report
About
PCI’s 401(k) Investment Lineup vs. Passive Scorecard (ILPS) answers the question ‘Do 401(k) investment lineups outperform all-index lineups?’
Annually, PCI sponsors research examining whether investment options in Defined Contribution (DC) Plans, such as 401(k)s, perform better than similar market indices. It indicates whether the funds included in 401(k) lineups benefit retirement plan participants, compared to if they were invested in the corresponding and relative index.
This information is crucial for a nation relying on DC plans as the primary means for its workers’ retirement.
The 2026 update, reflecting findings from the 2023 plan year, was conducted by the Pension Consultants Team.
Access the full results in the 401(k) Investment Lineup vs. Passive Scorecard report by submitting the form.
Download the 401(k) Investment Lineup vs. Passive Scorecard Report
This Years Findings
41.5% of plans outperformed an all-index lineup.
Reporting from the 2023 plan year returns.
The results from the latest update for the 2023 year at the plan level show that 41.50% of plans achieved a higher expected return than an all-index lineup. Generally, the percentage of plans that outperformed their benchmark plan, as measured by expected return, was higher for plans with a smaller market value.
This pattern may reflect differences in plan design and governance, as smaller plans often have greater agility in implementing changes. The findings reinforce the role of strategic oversight and intentional investment selection in improving expected return outcomes.
Percentage of Defined Contribution Plans Outperforming an All-Index Lineup on a Year-By-Year Basis.
41.50%
2022
57.49%
2021
38.87%
2020
75.51%
2019
25.07%
2018
27.86%
2017
82.66%
2016
10.59%
2015
30.48%
2014
11.96%
The analysis is based on approximately 5,000 retirement plans, randomly sampled from 2023 Form 5500 filings and stratified across four asset tiers: $1M–$10M, $10M–$100M, $100M–$500M, and over $500M in plan assets.
The sample is restricted to audited defined contribution plans with at least 100 participants, a minimum of $1 million in assets, and at least three non-money-market mutual funds in the investment lineup. These criteria are intended to ensure comparability across plans while maintaining a representative view of mid- to large-sized retirement plans in the market.
This structure allows for consistent cross-sectional analysis of plan investment lineups and helps control for variation in plan size, diversification level, and governance complexity.
Overall, the dataset provides a broad empirical foundation for evaluating how retirement plan investment outcomes compare against a passive benchmark across differing asset scales and plan characteristics.
Previous Summaries By Year
2022
Access the 2022 research update, released in 2025.
- The percentage of plans that achieved a higher expected return than their benchmark was 57.49%
2021
Access the 2021 research update, released in 2024.
- The percentage of plans that achieved a higher expected return than their benchmark was 38.87%
2020
Access the 2020 research update, released in 2023.
- The percentage of plans that achieved a higher expected return than their benchmark was 25.66%
Research Foundation
The Investment Lineup vs. Passive Scorecard (ILPS) is based on a research framework originally developed through academic work published in the Journal of Financial Counseling and Planning. This research introduced a methodology for evaluating whether 401(k) investment lineups produce different outcomes compared to index-based approaches.
Since then, that framework has been used as the foundation for PCI’s ongoing annual analysis, allowing for consistent evaluation of plan performance over time.
Dr. Rui Yao, Ph.D., CFP®
Dr. Rui Yao, Ph.D., CFP®
(Lead Research (2013-2022) and Author of Original Study)
Professor and Director of Graduate Studies of Personal Finance Planning at the University of Missouri
Weipeng Wu, MA,
Cody Mendenhall, CFP
(Co-authors of Original Study)
*Credentials as of original publication date