Supreme Court: 401(k) case over private funds and underperformance
cramer4next
15 points
1 comment
October 11, 2026
Related Discussions
Found 5 related stories in 87.0ms across 9,063 title embeddings via pgvector HNSW
- Berkshire's $397B Bet Against an Overheated Market emsidisii · 96 pts · July 13, 2026 · 44% similar
- Goldman Says Hedge Funds Had Worst July vs. S&P 500 in 20 Years tcp_handshaker · 15 pts · August 21, 2026 · 42% similar
- Connecticut judge says plaintiff hid messages for AI in court filings nomilk · 11 pts · August 14, 2026 · 41% similar
- NFL asks Supreme Court to regulate prediction markets at the state level lucaspauker · 12 pts · October 08, 2026 · 40% similar
- Storm clouds gather over America's financial supremacy pseudolus · 63 pts · July 12, 2026 · 40% similar
Discussion Highlights (1 comments)
SpicyLemonZest
I feel like this is just a gap in ERISA. The actual problem here is that Intel included a massive private equity component in its target date funds , which are sold and widely understood to be cautious vehicles for maximizing the chance of a comfortable retirement at the target date. But ERISA was written at a time when there was no such thing as a target date fund (even index funds barely existed), and few retail investors had the financial literacy to form meaningful opinions about their allocation between investment classes. So the plaintiffs are forced to have a proxy argument about "prudence" in the abstract, rather than the actual problem that they were misled about the contents of the funds. It feels like what this really wants to be is a standalone "private fund" in the 401k plan, which employees can allocate or not allocate their contributions to an X% cap. But I'm not sure you can actually do that under the rules as they exist today.