Automatic Features to Help Boost Participation and Savings Rates

September 26, 2024

The use of automatic features in 401(k) plans has continued to climb in popularity over the past decade. In fact, auto features such as automatic enrollment and auto escalation are considered best practices in 401(k) plan design as ways to help boost participation and employee savings rates.[1]


Many large 401(k) retirement plans offer auto features. However, small business plan sponsors have been slower to adopt them as part of their 401(k) plan design. If your company’s retirement plan design doesn’t currently include auto features, and/or if you’re thinking about implementing them, then keep reading.

Small Plans Playing Catch Up


The majority of retirement plans (60%) use automatic enrollment. However, there is a noteworthy disparity between the usage of auto enrollment in large versus small 401(k) plans. Nearly three-quarters (73%) of large plans (those with assets of $200 million or more) use automatic enrollment as compared to 63% of smaller plans (those with assets of less than $200 million).[1]


Simply stated, auto enrollment occurs when an employee reaches the plan’s edibility requirements and is then automatically enrolled in the company’s retirement plan.


Likewise, the uptake of auto escalation — a plan feature that automatically increases participants’ contributions each year up to a specified limit — is more prevalent in large than in small plans. Seventy-six percent of large plans use auto escalation versus just 55% of small plans. Among plans with auto escalation, the majority increase participant deferrals by 1% per year.[1]

 

When an employee starts saving earlier (auto enrollment) and is regularly nudged to save more (auto escalation), these two plan design features can have a substantial impact on that employee’s future retirement savings. Plan sponsors have the power to implement ideas that encourage better retirement savings. 

 


The Impact of Auto Features


Automatic enrollment can significantly improve plan participation. According to a recent survey from the Defined Contribution Institutional Investment Association (DCIIA), before the implementation of automatic enrollment, only 11% of plans had participation rates over 90%. Post-implementation, the percentage of plans with more than 90% participation increased more than fourfold to 46%.[1]

 

In addition, since automatic enrollment increases plan participation, it also improves the likelihood of a plan passing nondiscrimination testing.

 

What’s more, automatic enrollment improves savings rates, and adding auto escalation can further boosts the impact. In plans with neither automatic enrollment or auto escalation, only 44% have savings rates above 10% (includes both employee deferrals and employer matching contributions). In plans that implement automatic enrollment only, the percentage of participants with savings rates above 10% increases to 67%. Where plan sponsors have implemented both automatic enrollment and auto escalation, that percentage rises to 70%![2]

 

Financial experts recommend that workers save 15% of their pay each year to achieve a comfortable retirement.[3] According to DCIIA, a combination of automatic enrollment and auto escalation is helping more 401(k) plan participants hit that goal, thus increasing their chances of being better prepared for retirement.

 


Getting Smaller Employers on Board

Despite the stated positive impacts of auto features on retirement readiness, some employers have chosen not to adopt them for a variety of reasons. One concern is the fear of employee pushback, including worries that employees will complain.[4]

 

However, many real case and research studies have found that these concerns are largely unfounded. Opt-out rates for both automatic enrollment and auto escalation are negligible, suggesting that even if employees have initial concerns about the implementation of these plan design features, they generally do not act (i.e., opt out).[5]


There is no one-size-fits-all retirement plan design. However, if your plan goals include boosting participation, increasing employee deferrals, passing nondiscrimination testing, and improving overall retirement readiness, CONTACT US to learn more about automatic enrollment and auto escalation. The implementation of auto features in your company’s 401(k) plan may be a solution worth exploring.


_


[1] “Plan Sponsor Survey - Cdn.ymaws.com.” Www.DCIIA.org, Defined Contribution Institutional Investment Association, Apr. 2020.

[2] DCIIA Fourth Biennial Plan Sponsor Survey “Auto Features Continue to Grow in Popularity.” December 2017.*

[3] “How Much Money Should I Save Each Year for Retirement?” Fidelity, Fidelity, 31 July 2021.

[4] “Plan Sponsor Survey - Cdn.ymaws.com.” Www.DCIIA.org, Defined Contribution Institutional Investment Association, Apr. 2020.

[5] DCIIA Fourth Biennial Plan Sponsor Survey “Auto Features Continue to Grow in Popularity.” December 2017.*

*More recent data may alter this assessment.


September 15, 2026
The Challenge Sometimes the most expensive retirement plan mistakes aren't dramatic. They're quiet. A former client of ours changed retirement plan providers following an acquisition several years prior. On the surface, everything appeared to be operating normally after moving to the new provider: employees continued making contributions to the plan, the plan’s investments remained in place, and the business continued its normal operations. Then another merger opportunity came along. As part of their due diligence process, the buyers reviewed the retirement plan. What they found immediately raised concerns. The annual Form 5500 filings required by ERISA law had not been submitted for several years. That also meant that none of the required compliance testing had been completed, and routine administrative responsibilities had also gone undone. What had started as a routine review quickly became a significant obstacle to completing the business sale. The Hidden Risk Many employers assume that once a retirement plan provider is hired, responsibility for the plan’s ongoing administration has effectively been transferred to that provider. But a plan sponsor is never completely relieved of its responsibility to oversee the plan. Even when outside providers are hired to handle filings, testing, recordkeeping, or other administrative functions, the employer still needs to make sure those responsibilities are being fulfilled. At the same time, there is an important difference between a provider that simply waits for the employer to supply information and one that actively works with the employer to make sure the plan stays on track. In this case, some of the missing work may have resulted from information requested by the provider that was never supplied by the employer. Technically, the employer still had a responsibility to provide that information and ensure the work was completed. But years of required administration should not quietly disappear into a communication gap. A proactive administrator follows up. If the usual contact isn’t responding, they escalate the issue. They make sure the appropriate people understand what is outstanding, why it matters, and what could happen if it isn’t addressed. Retirement plans require ongoing attention every year, including government filings, compliance testing, participant administration, documentation, and, when necessary, operational corrections. When those responsibilities are neglected, the consequences may not become obvious immediately. Instead, problems can accumulate quietly in the background until an IRS inquiry, Department of Labor investigation, audit, or—as in this case—a business transaction suddenly exposes years of unresolved issues. The prospective buyer made it clear that the retirement plan issues needed to be addressed before the transaction could move forward. The Rescue Knowing we had previously administered their plan, the current company leadership contacted us. Our first step was to determine the full scope of the problem. The timing made the situation particularly challenging. This wasn’t simply a retirement plan cleanup project. A business transaction was underway, and the company needed answers quickly. We assembled a team to determine the full scope of the problem and begin developing a path forward. Because we have deep experience with taking over neglected plans, we were able to separate perceived problems from actual compliance issues and reconstruct the plan's history. In reviewing the prior documentation, we identified exactly which administrative functions had been completed and which had been missed. We gathered historical payroll and participant data and developed a comprehensive correction strategy. Having access to historical plan records was especially important. Retirement plan problems may not surface until years after the underlying event, making good record retention critical. If you’re curious about how long to hold onto plan documentation, please see our blog post here . The final correction effort proved to be far more manageable than originally feared. Instead of allowing uncertainty around the retirement plan to continue hanging over the transaction, the employer now understood what had actually gone wrong, what needed to be corrected, and what steps were required to move forward. The Outcome With the correction efforts clarified and a clear roadmap in place, the employer was able to begin correcting the plan and continue moving toward its business transaction. More importantly, the company avoided entering the acquisition process with unresolved retirement plan liabilities hanging over or ruining the deal. The experience also reinforced an important lesson: Changing retirement plan providers doesn't eliminate administrative responsibilities. But it also demonstrated why the quality of the administrator matters. A good retirement plan administrator doesn’t simply process the information that arrives. They help make sure the information arrives in the first place. The Lesson: Oversight Is a Shared Process Employers ultimately have a responsibility to oversee their retirement plans, even when they hire professionals to handle much of the day-to-day work. That doesn’t mean the employer should have to become a retirement plan expert or personally track every filing deadline and compliance requirement. That’s one of the reasons experienced administration matters. A proactive provider should help keep the employer informed, identify missing information, follow up when something is outstanding, and escalate issues before a missed request becomes a missed filing—or several years of missed filings. The cost of failing to do so can extend well beyond an annual administration fee: Missed filings and potential penalties Incomplete compliance testing Corrective work Additional professional fees Delayed business transactions Uncertainty during mergers and acquisitions  By the time those costs appear, they can far exceed whatever might have been saved by choosing a lower-cost service model. That’s why retirement plan administration shouldn’t simply be viewed as paperwork. It should be viewed as an ongoing partnership in managing risk.
August 18, 2026
The Challenge A business owner came to us after receiving confusing news from their retirement plan actuary. Their Defined Benefit (Cash Balance) Plan had performed exceptionally well over several years; strong investment returns seemed to have created what’s called an overfunded Plan. While it seems like a positive name, an overfunded plan can create excessive and unexpected tax liabilities. So, their actuary recommended terminating the Plan by transferring the excess assets into the company's other Plan, a 401(k)/Profit Sharing Plan, before eventually closing both Plans, a lengthy and complicated process.
July 15, 2026
As we wrap up the second quarter of 2026, one trend continues to stand out: retirement plans are becoming increasingly specialized. Whether driven by changing regulations, unique workforce structures, or evolving business goals, employers are finding that a one-size-fits-all approach simply doesn't work. This quarter, we explored the unique retirement plan challenges facing several industries—including medical and dental practices, construction companies, architecture and design firms, wineries, and California employers navigating CalSavers requirements. We also continued our series on the hidden risks of low-quality retirement plan services, highlighting how operational complexity, fragmented accountability, and misaligned incentives can create costs that extend far beyond administrative fees. For employers still evaluating their retirement plan options, we also discussed opportunities that many business owners overlook, including the ability to establish retirement plans after filing a tax extension and potentially generate meaningful tax savings. Below is a recap of the articles we published this quarter. We hope they provide practical insights to help you reduce risk, improve plan performance, and make more informed retirement plan decisions.
More Posts