“Characteristics of the Population With Consumer-Driven and High-Deductible Health Plans, 2005–2012,” and “Retirement Plan Participation and Asset Allocation, 2010”

Consumer-driven Health Plans: It is often assumed that consumer-driven health plan enrollees are more likely than those with traditional coverage to be young, because they use less health care, on average. However, that is generally not the case in recent years, according to new research by EBRI. <A href="http://www.ebri.org/pdf/PR-1023.24Apr13.Notes-Hlth.pdf">Press release. </A> Multiple Retirement Plans: People who own more than one type of retirement plan are more likely to invest a higher percentage in equities (stocks) than those who don’t, according to new research by EBRI. <A href="http://www.ebri.org/pdf/PR-1024.25Apr13.Notes-Ret1.pdf">Press release. </A>

Characteristics of the Population With Consumer-Driven and High-Deductible Health Plans, 2005–2012

Generally, the population of adults within both high-deductible (HDHP) and traditional health plans have been split 50–50 between men and women. In contrast, differences in gender have been found between consumer-driven health plan (CDHP) enrollees and those with traditional coverage.
In most years, CDHP enrollees were less likely than those with traditional coverage to be between the ages of 21 and 34, and the CDHP population was more likely than traditional-plan enrollees to be in households with $150,000 or more in income in every year except 2009 and 2010.
CDHP enrollees were roughly twice as likely as individuals with traditional coverage to have college or post-graduate educations in nearly all years of the survey.
CDHP enrollees have consistently reported better health status than traditional-plan enrollees, exhibiting better health behavior than traditional-plan enrollees with respect to smoking and (except for 2010 and 2011), exercise, and sometimes obesity rates.

Retirement Plan Participation and Asset Allocation, 2010

The likelihood of a working family head participating in a retirement plan increased with the size of his or her employer. In 2010, among family heads working for employers with 10–19 employees, 22.4 percent participated in a plan, compared with 67.2 percent of family heads who worked for employers with 500 or more employees.
In 2010, 18.9 percent of family heads who participated in an employment-based retirement plan had a defined benefit (DB) plan only, while 65.0 percent had a defined contribution (DC) plan only, and the remaining 16.1 percent had both a DB and a DC plan. This was a significant change from 1992, when 42.3 percent had a DB plan only, and 40.8 percent had a DC plan only.
Asset allocation within a family head’s retirement plan seems to be affected by his or her ownership of other types of retirement plans. Those who own an IRA are more likely to be invested all in stocks if they also own a 401(k)-type of plan. Those who own a DB plan and a 401(k)-type plan are less likely to allocate their DC plan to all interest-earning assets.

12 10 F Figur igure 2 e 3 was a to report The coverage to From 1 more than More rec are inv The 2 per decr 004 Surve ested 9centa 9 e that 2 ntly 7 – ease from 2 5 be ages 35–44. more he ge 0 they smoke, perce (20 07, y of Co of 1workers i 0 participa n – 2 t in avily i nsumer Fi 2012 007, sto ), n but no n n when No cks in th stocks in t there pu ts nances questions on emplo statisticall with blic 4 recent differ wer 6 admi assets eir I .9e pe h no e R ni r iy signi A. Of those r 4 c statistically si stration ha invested ent of 01 e(nces k)-type fican work al wer t y w d t di lm Figure 4 in Figure 1 in h ent pl h ffer gnif e g f o ha e lar interest-earni fou an -based retire a ences icant and also mily h d nd gest 25 in di bet per e ex incr ffer ads men w cent or e own a en r een e partic ase in cis nces g t plans w assets e rates th n less in e two IRA by em the ipate edecre , a re signi i h r l d vested i pl groups ave a n iik n a d oyer size elihood of ased diff ficantly plan. high ere wer n as stoc revised f nces betw family pro e From pa fks in th o b rticipatin have n und abil een t 19 rincome om prior in t ity of also 92 eir he ever he –20 g 40 CDHP in yea 1 07, be ( a rk)- en pla s t ’ he n Characteristics of the Popul Retirement Plan Participation and Asset Allocation, 2010 ation With Consumer-Driven and a Household Income, by Type of Health Plan, 2005–2012 Figure 5 surveys and ret Percent ained in 2007 and a Selected ge of Selected Indiv 2010. One of the He idua alth Sta De l R mographics, etitrement goals of these re us Indicato Account by rs, by T viy sions w s ( pe of T IR yA a pe of Health Plan, 2005–2 s to better identif Health Plan, 2005 s) and 401(k)y -T th ye t pe Plan y–201 pe of plan in 2 Family 012 w hic H h the ead workers were percentage of bein increase found in popul type perce (from 75. g plan, ntage aheavily tion rates d2 per 26. a b an bo e i d that 5 percent vtween n workers partic of obesity. Ho ce vested ent $25,0 of to the the 89. 0 in sto ha 0 a 0 percent for p g d eo c all th wever, s ipatin partic pula ks in th of 4 eir I tion g r 5 ipants ) it – , whil 54, eir I e w R ca main A a i an nn th R e those in ssets invested traditio A. Consequ ot be ed d only both in a d typ in worki etermi very s nal co 2 es e 009 n nt og verage. ned fm ly, in wa in t palans. inter ll ran partici from t s he m the population with est-ea For ge, p inin he ants fr 40 g s rning assets, a om just belo urvey wh 1(k in t and co )-typ hese nstructi e ethe pla plan w tra n 46 r pla n s ge d on in partic d itio 47.0 percent to just over n nerally nal dustry ha des ipants perce covera ig inve n ihad a n n t ha ge com d th s 2t them i 010, d n im e lar 25 this ppact 48 g osed perc n est sim per- on ent of a ilar High-Deductible Health Plans, 2005–2012 By Craig Copeland, Ph.D., Employee Benefit Research Institute Participan Jotint a s in Percen nd Conditiona ta2005 ge Gro l Dis up 2006 in tg ris butions of Eq 2007 u of ity A Indiv 2008 llocat idua ionl Re 2009 , by F tira emily me 2010 nt A Head cc C 2011 ounts haract ' Serist toc 2012 k ics, 2010 participating. This included differentiating between defined benefit and defined contribution, but also within the plan types. Therefore, a cash cent. larger manners, perce health decrease or less of their IRA assets in n The share of 55 status, tage in spo des th de p n e like smoking, e creased ite some sorship rat -lihood of 64-year from pa x e er rt -(the o icipants 20.2 cise, or o partici stocks. lds than perce pe prcent atin havin th b nesit tage of g e C a g (f y rates. m signific D rom 36. ong HP those popu family antly 7 wor latio perc h dif k e n. ent ing ads fere to 24. for with nt alloc emplo fami 0 pe ations across t yly rcent). ers that spo incomes Famoily heads workin fn h sored a e t $10, wo 00plan 0 pla up types. n to ) remained at g $2 in 5,0 th00 e remain to o r just ing 2005 2005 2006 2006 2007 2007 2008 2008 2009 2009 2010 2010 2011 2011 2012 2012 April 2013 • Vol. 34, No. 4 a a Less than $30,000 11 When comparing HDHP enrollees with traditional-plan enrollees it was found that, in all years of the survey except Male balance answA er llo wacat s ad io ded, and ns of IR F as w amily ell as a 401( Head IRA k) plan, thrift sa Ow As ners T vings plan, and 40 hat Are Also 3(b) plan d 401(k)-e T signation, among oth ype Plan 401(k)-T Part ype Plans icipant ers, instead s, of just a By Paul Fronstin, Ph. Self-Rated He D., Employee B alth Status enefit Research Insti tute over 6 1 industries 2.3 pe 1rce perce ex nt perienc for nt from those ed eith 19 w92 ith – efami r no c 2007. lyh ian n come ges or very small of $100,000 ior ncrea more. ses or The de percenta clines in ge thwit eir hle all vels of their part investments icipation. I in nsto 20cks 10, a Traditional 15% 12% 15% 14% 11% 14% 11% 8% a a All Stock Allocation All Stock Allocation 49% 49% Whil 200 Similar r If th7, HDH e family h e the ese r sults wer P e en e sults provide i ad rollees e had more foun wer d i en lm compari e than ss likely th portant i 75 perc ng th nfor an ent of the assets e HDHP m traditio ation on po nal-pla beh pulation avior n in h enro w iwit s or h llees ith tra hin retirement to ed r itional-cov 401 be with (k)-type lar savings pla eg ra e pl ge employers an an enroll d th ns, they ees. e I (5Other tha R 0A assets inclu 0 do or mor not include the ne i n 200 ded 9, 401(k)-type-plan grouping as befo bTraditional y 401(k)- rT e. Ho ype Plan wever, b St y including these revisions ock Allocatio 50% n an d in the su Ro 48% llo rvey, the tr ver St 50% atends a u50% s o fc t ross plan types could no he IRA 50% , 2010 50% t be directly Excellent/ver b y good mining- were relat and c ively o nstruction-i similar for 401(k ndustry work )-type parti ers ended a cipants with decl in ine i comes n their of lik $1elihood of 0,000 or mo part re icipatin but incg rein a ase r d e atirement long with plan fami , with ly Introduction HDHP 11 17* 12* 9* 10 4* 8* 8 Appendix a b Interest 1%- 26%- 51%- 76%- Interest 1%- 26%- 51%- 76%- employees type o HDHP e rollover assets, the f detail nrolle ). T eon asset alloc h Traditional sey w were HDHP cinvestme e less l re mor ikely than ation within en like t in the ly to those IRA be 4 f 01(k was more rom small em with 53 42% ) plans tra 49 d likel 54% ition thFigure 1 at is ployers i y to have al covera 51 provi 49% nd all ge to a e 50 d 56% hi y by the gher e be ages 21–34. They ars of t 48 stock allo 59% EBRI h e sur /I 46 CI Partici 59% cation vey exc 47 (76. 58% p ewere ant pt4 for -Directed percent 48 more likely th 2010. 60 of t Retir hose ement an assessed. The revised questions appeared to be better able to identify defined benefit plans, particularly hybrid plans such as cash balance All IRA -Stock Allocation the income partici for pati IRA CDHP on incr ownee rs. asing from 24.0 percent in 2007 to 28.4 percent in 2010. Workers in all of the other industries 11 13 6* 4* 3* 3* 3* 4* Various data sources are available for measuring the percentage of workers with retirement plans through or outside Category b c Earning 25% 50% 75% 99% 100% Earning 25% 50% 75% 99% 100% a 19 This study is based on data from the 2005–2007 EBRI/Commonwealth Fund Consumerism in Health Care Survey and HDHP CDHP 57 50 50 53 57* 54* 54* 54 52 59 44 58 44 56 44* 56 Percen 401(k tage )-T of Wor ype Plan king Family Heads Whose Employers Sponsor a Retirement Plan and the Plan those wit Introduction with plans. Therefo Data Co a rollov h tra re e, llection rd had more tha the increased pe itionalProject coveraor on I ge to n rcentage of 50 be a percent i RAs tha g work es Intn 35– t is provided eres ers stocks, w 44 t ith a def only compared in ine 1% b201 d y - benefit plan fou the E 0, a with B nRI I d oth 26% 70. R2 percent -A Datab end in 2004 r than in ase. H 51% of t 2 wa 0 -s 1 ho more likely 1 ose wit wever, t , ther 76% e hwer no du h -ese e t r eo o results no di llover). better i fferenc dentification do For pro e s in vide $30,000–$49,999 experienc Total ed declines in 201 20.8% 0. 15.9% 20.3% 12.6% 6.9% 23.5% 13.2% 20.3% 22.5% 14.8% 7.7% 21.4% c of employment. This Femal informa e tion allows for the development of models that can simulate retirees’ potential incomes CDHP a 58* 60* 65* 66* 64 67* 66* 69* Characteristics of the Popul the 2008–2012 EBRI/MGA Consumer Engagement in He ation With Consumer-Driven and Figure 5 alth Car e Survey. They are online surveys of privately insured Stock Allocation Earning 25% 50% 75% 99% 100% Head Tradit 's Par ional ticipation b 19y Emplo 20yer Size and Indu 18 19 stry, 1992, 19 17 95, 2004, 20 17 16 07, and 2010 13 some evidenc the As family h of plan t family-hea perce ype t eads ntag han with d e eto an actual c of s bet IRA how a re own wee lative parti e n th rs’ han ly low cipants e ag ages ge to defined be es of investm incre who o 4 ase 5–w 54. I d ent i nefit plans. , n th both ty n n e stocks (25 lik 200 eliho 7, pes 2 od of r 008, th perc e 2 at tirem 011, they ent or e an nt w e d 2 less) in their plans a re 0in 1vested 2 it llocate wasal 401(k found l their assets a in stocks )-ty that pe pla the decm HDHP reased. nong , the pr both ty pop For esenc ula pes of tion e of Family Income In 2001, a handful of employers started offering health reimbursement arrangements (HRAs)—a then-new type of a 51 51 b from these plans as b well as other sources of retirement assets that can be used for income in retirement. Good Traditional 50 52 50 50 50 50 Joint Distribution adults ages 21 HDHP –64, fielded in August Firm Size, by of each year. T Th ype of Health Plan, 2005–2 e surveys were conducted to 012 pr ovide nationally representative 19 30* 18 14* 16 14 16 14 <10,000 22.8 17.0 28.0 12.2 4.8 15.4 15.8 24.6 12.1 0.2 6.2 41.2 High-Deducti plans inclu exampl a rollover ded a , ae, nd also amo this larg le n can er shar g d to a those bee o evalu hi aub n gh f der 5le Health Plans, 2005–2012, e 5–6 ar likeli ted age 4-ye with 1992 35, har-ol ood of fut 29.5 ds than th ur their I e res percent ults RA e wer from 1995 population bein e g inv inves the com ested mo ted with ball ine tr in d aditional 2004 re in stocks, IRA an stocks th cover d compared 401 p. 2 (k age. an was ) databas 2007 with the 13.6 e ca tha se for t percent t EBRI hose 2010 is of tho se b health plan. The most prevalent HRA plan des 47 ign th 51 en had a deductible of at least $1,000 for employee-only coverage c Traditional 45 35 38 34 32 34 34 32 13 HDHP 49 50 52 54 53 52 (Percentage) CDHP Retireme $10,000 up nt Plan Participation, by Plan Type to $25,000 36.4 22 21.2 18.1 24 2.5 13 4.5 10* 17.3 10*20.2 11 23.9 14.7 10* 14.9 10 2.4 23.9 The term 401(k)-type plan is used in this study, because the SCF combined Sec. 401(k) plans with Sec. 403(b) plans and supplemental data regarding the growth of CDHPs and HDHPs and the impact of these plans, and consumer engagement more 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 ® b c currently ages without 75 a rol or com ollder. opvletin er (48. A g simila . 7 perc r pattern ent, compared with emerged Head with 31.0 per r egard to cen Head the t h age aving m of 401(k)-type ore than Head 5 0participants percent in stock H wh eado swer in th e ieir I nvested RA). He all ad 43 50 and a tax-preferred account that could be tapped by workers and their families to pay out-of-pocket health care The Employee HDHP Bene CDHP fit Resea rch Institute (EBRI) 36 deve 34 loped 43* th 35 e EBRI-R 46 34 etirement 48 30 Sec 56* u 32 rity 56* Projectio 34 56* n Mod 34 el (RSPM), All Interest Earning 5.8% 1.9% 2.4% 1.2% 0.4% 2.4% $50,000–$99,999 $25,000 up to $50,000 24.1 20.0 18.2 11.3 4.4 22.1 14.4 24.8 19.8 10.8 5.8 24.5 retirement a EBRI Emp nnuities into one categor loyee Benefit Resear y in surve ch Institute Not ys prior to 2004. es (ISSN Fo1085 r consistency ?4452) 18 is purp publish oses, the plans are grou ed monthly by the ped in thi Employee s public Benefit ation to allow Research In 2 gene 0rally, o 10, 1 Race— 8.9 n t perce hF e ew behavior di n c t of fferenc fa a mily hea ne d attit s in pu d la des of s n enro who partici adu llment lts wit p t ate ype hd pr were in ivate h an fo em un eploy alth d by race. ment-based retirement insurance cover Other tha age. Hi n in 2 pla 0 gh 05 deductibl n , 2 had a 011, an DB ed s were plan 2012, only, Self-employed WE ith No Emplo mployer Partic yees i- Employer Partici- Employ er Partic i- Em ployer Partici- E mployer Partici- Married a in stocks, but iCDHP t level ed off after age 64, ac cordin 34 g to 33 the SCF. 29* 30 27 28* 28* 25* 1%-25% th 1.8 4.1 2.5 1.8 0.9 3.7 Retirement Plan Par expenses. T which allows he for T Medicare radit the ional estimation Prescription of 34 the Dru ticipation and Asset Allocation, 2010 addi g, tional 38 Improvement, savin 36gs that and Moderni curr 36 ent workers z 38 ation Act o woul 37 fd 2need 003 incl 37 ?beyond uded asavings provision 36 th to a at , p. 9 llow $50,000 up to $100,000 21.6 15.7 21.8 9.9 6.6 24.2 12.8 22.5 23.5 15.1 6.4 19.9 a Institute, 1100 13 St. NW, Suite 878, Washington, DC 20005-4051, at $300 per year or is included as part of a membership for a comparison wTraditional ith prior years. aThus, these are not pure 4 2% 01(k) p4% lan results. 3% 2% 3% 3% 3% 3% b Sponsors pates Sponsors pates Sponsors pates Sponsors pates Sponsors pates there while define 6 wer d as 5.0 Asset Allocatio e per i no ndi di c vidual ent h ffere de ances d nducti a D by in C DB the b pla les Statu dis n only, of at tri sbutio leas and Account and th t $1, n of 60 e rem enrol 000 an 74 Balan a lees inin d f a g 1 when ce mily d ? 6.1 Fa comp percent educt mily hea ari ibng t les had bot ds of he C wh at l o partici DHP h a eas D t popul B an $2,0 pate d a 00. a i tion n DC both Thos wit ple a h thos an (Fi with 401(k)-type hi g e ure cover gh 2 ). ed This plan by 1 Fair/poo 26%-50% Traditional r 3.0 2.4 78 67 6.3 78 2.876 75 0. 5 76 4.5 HDHP subscription. $100,000 or m Pe orriodicals e postag 14.5 e 36 rate 12.5 paid 35 20.3 in Washingt 17.9 38 on, DC, 9.2 40 and 25.6 additional 43*12.3mailing 47* 15.0offices. 24.2 37 POSTMASTER 17.4 36 10.7 : Send 20.4 address individuals with certain high-deductible health plans to contribute to a health savings account (HSA). HRAs and HSA- would be generated assumi b ng existing saving behavior within tax-qualified plans ?in order to maintain their same Endnotes HDHP c a b th 9* 9* 9* (percenta 7* ge)7* 5* 9* 9* 61 55* traditional was a si deductibles and either and a As the D eB gni d ucat plan pla fica in wer o nt chan 51% s, and that nal e -75% attai mor ge an H ne fro me lik 2R 005 nt m ely to A or an HSA c 19 of di 92, family ffhave m erenc wh en he e may have o 42. ads 1. o re than nstituted th 3 3 incr perce e ha ased, be nt lf 2. e en of the had a 3 CDHP sample, the due likeli i D r assets to a B h plan ood small sampl 3.3 in t only, a that and those wi he I40 Rnd A 1(k e 7. 40. parti si 5)ze o -type 8 p cipants thf deduct e minor rcent plan 1. were inve 8 ha iibl tiee d s s , which s in a DC ted in that were vested pla 2. stocks was 9 all n on in ly. than changes Age of Head to: CDHP Traditional EBRHDHP I Notes , 1100 13 St. NW, 13 Suite 878, 12 Washington, 64* 13 62* 10 DC 2000 64* 9 5-4051. 68 7 Copy 67* right 9 2013 70* b 9 y Employee Benefit 33 1 43 41 40 45* 54* 33 36 14 c standard eligi 1 ble plans of livare today coll ing throughou ectively r t retirem ee ferr nt.ed to Furt as consu hermore, m this er-dr mode ivenl he waalth s updated plans (CD to sH imulate Ps). “at-risk” ratings for those All The type of interest-ear CDHP b ning asset or stock is not differentiated fr c 8* om 5 these questions. 6* 7* 5 5 3 5 61.3% 48.3% 60.7% 47.9% 61.0% 46.1% 60.5% 46.9% 58.0% 44.6% See Jack VanDerhei and C Research Institute. All rights raig reserved, Copeland, “ Vol. Can 34, America Afford T 59 no. 4. 61* omorrow’s Retirees: Results from the EBRI-ERF Retirement Security 76%-99% 1.0 0.6 1.2 1.0 4.5 2.8 <35 $100, HDHP 000–$149, CDHP 999 18.6 17.4 22.6 13 4.9 13 7.1 70* 10 29.5 71 12 14.7 70* 11 21.7 67 10 19.6 78 10 8.4 78 9 7.4 28.1 addr Virtually gene 401(k)-type interest-earni essed i rally all hig of n participants h n 2 enou the ch g 006. assets In gh ange oc 20 to m decre wh 11 e o wer and curred pr et th ased. 20 e e S 12, not quali peci ior to it als ffy ic w o ing t ally, a 1998, in a s foun hres 4 D 2 exc .8 B d th hol plan perc e d t at pt. In o the C ent for a si make ta fact, sli ofD fam HP gnix- pop ily-h fg ica pr hteferr n ly more t ulation ead t declin e Id R contri A was m e i h partic an n DB-only butions half oipants re like (50.7 to covera ly to without per anb cent) of HSA but e ge t w high hite, hat occu school those wit non ho -rr ut an with ed a 2 c a likely Emplo to yer Size run short 2–49 Emplo of income yees in r etirement. A T A G L A N C E Has children 100% 2.2 1.4 2.7 1.3 0.8 13.2 Projection Model,” 35-44 TCDHP radit EBRI Issue Brief, 12ional 13.1 no. 263 14 15.2 (Emplo 14 21.6 yee Ben 9 11.1 efit Research Institute, N 14 7* 9.86* 14 29.25* 17 ovember 2003 12.6 8 15 18.5 ).5 24.6 17 6* 12.8 20 6* 9.8 21.6 Hispanic t DB f 15 account consti diplomas rom 20 plan ha 04 wer h –d an 200 more than ethe tuted th investe 7. popu d e HD lation hal al al fin inv HP sample. with inter ested a tr est-ear in s aditio Mtn o ocks, compar ire in n nal h g assets, formatio ealth pla co ed n ab mp n. with ared ou 4 t th 2 with .9 e 2 percent 17.0 012 EBRI perc of t /MGA Consumer ent hose amwi ong thou those t a DB pl Engagement with an coll (Figure 6). ege in de Health grees. Initially, projections for growth of CDHPs were strong. In reality, growth has c been slow, but steady. By 2012, 36 per- b This article does not ex Traditional amine th ae percentage of families or fam 15 ily 19 heads who o 19 wn IR 16 As or 401(k) 15 -type plans. It onl 16 16 y ex17 amines the asset Fewer than 10 employees 11.9 9.0 34 10.7 42 7.9 13.7 11.0 11.2 8.4 9.0 7.7 45-54 15.3 13.8 18.9 18.8Condit 6.0 ional D 27.3 istribution, 10.4 by 401(k)-T 21.3 y 23.1 pe Plan 19.1 6.7 19.3 HDHP At least one chro Traditional nic health condition** 11 5* 14 47 19* 42 16 44 19*40 17 43 43 16 b The Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI) was founded in 1978. Its mission is to Care S Furthermore, 401(k)-type participants This pattern urvey c alaso n be emerged c found ifo n Fronstin r 401(k)-ty (20 wi pth e-plan 12 o). u t a D partic B pipa lann we ts. r e more likely to be invested all in interest-earning assets 2 a cent of em One 10–19 RSPM plo find yers with 500 ing HDHP show ed b th or more at 42.2 the num work 29.9 be ers offered either a r of fut 31* 28.0 ure years 32* 22.3 that n HRA 27* workers 36.3 - or HSA-eligi 26* are 25.4 eligibl 25* ble e plan, to 32.0 26 partici coverin p 27* 18.1 ate g 16 percent in 23* a de 30.9 fined of that 22.4 allocation of those who do o 55-64 wn su 18.0 ch accounts. Copeland (Septemb 15.2 33 23.0 14.5 35* Stock A er 2012 6.3 llocati ), op. cit., found from t 22.9 on and Ro 16.2 llover S 20.5 he 2 tatus o 010 SCF th 22.5 f the IRA at 28. 17.7 0 percent of 6.8 16.3 families CDHP 13 7* 20* 25* 24* 14 23* 24* See Jack VanDerhei, “Retir Traditional ement Income Adequacy for Boom 54 49 ers and Ge 49 n Xers: E 52 vidence from the 52 50 2012 EBRI Retir 52 ement Securit n/a y Employer Size HDHP ?In 201 0, family heads who worked 37* for the 37 largest em 39* ployers were 40 39* more 38* likely to have a DB c contribute to, to encourage, and to enhance the development of sound employee benefit When comparing HDHP enrollees and traditional-plan enrollees, it was found that in 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2011 a 2 b than those with a CDHP DB pla cn. 39* 32* 28* 25* 21* 23 20 17 20–99 65-74 ® Greater than 75% 26.2 51.2 16.7 37.6 9. 19.3 8 54.7 11.9 6.241.0 7.4 18.5 57.5 11.7 13.9 40.9 7. 14.6 1 57.3 21.016.2 41.5 24.8 52.8 8 49. .9 1 16.8 38.3 population, $150, up from t 000 or m he ore 32 percent that offered su 40 ch 44 a plan and 13 percent enrollment a year earlier. As a result, owned an I contributio Rn A/K (D eogh, and 31 HDHP C) pla n ha.1 p s a etreme rcent of all families had a membe ndous impact 56 on th 50 e “at-ri r participating in a 401(k)-t 53* sk” ratin 56 gs of various 54 ype plan. Furth co 52 horts. Spec ermo 55 ific re, ally, 36.3 percen n/a Gen Xers t of those with CDHP 45 46 49 47* 47 51* Projection Model, Who we are ” EBRI Notes, no. 5 (Employee Benefit Research Institute, May 2012): 2 ?14. plan (either alone or with a DC plan programs and so ) than those who und public policy worked for small through objective er employers. researFor example, ch and education. EBR 40.5 percent I is the only of Characteristics of the Population With a Consumer-Driven and High-Deductible high Among er perce IRA o nw tage o ners, fth He Dra HP ceenrolle of thees w fami ely re whit heade, no had n-Hi no signific spanic. Ho ant eff wev ect er, the on th 2 e 0 probability 05 finding o here f bei ma ng y also have invested all be in en 75+ c 39.9 20.2 14.7 6.2 5.4 13.6 b b b b b b 100–499 T 50–199 rRollover aditional 73.3 54.6 7.0 75.3 3.357.2 77.4 13.3 56.4 5.3 74.4 15.4 57.5 73.4 55.7 52.0 7779 10 10 12 16 CDHP Age 21–34 48 43* 45 45* 46* 45 48 n/a about families that ow no futu 25 re milli year non in ed an IRA had s of dividuals DC-plan a ewith ligi rollover IRA, but bility private wer in e surance, r simulated 44.5 percent of e to pre r tun he IRA assets were attributa senting abo short of m ut oney 14.6in percent retir ble t ement o o rollover IRAs. f the 60 market, .7 percent were of eith the ti er me, in a private, nonprofit, nonpartisan, Washington, DC-based organization committed exclusively to a participants who worked b for employers with 500 or more employees had a DB plan, compared with 22.3 percent of Health Plans, 2005–2012, by Paul Fronstin, Ph.D., EBRI Education of Head a References No Traditional Rollover 11.3 8 7.7 10 11 10.8 12 11 8.1 8 16. 13 7 8 45.5 d 3interest-earni 500 or mo ue to a small samp Perceive re n HDHP g assets, d Valu le size. e of but DB white, 88.8 Pla n non ?For family-hea -73.2 Hispanic 87.3 family d 401(k) pa he70.6 ads harti d cipants a 86.7 lower with likeli 67.3 a DB plan, hood of 86.0 bein the g ipercenta n 68.8 vested a ge hav 84.6 ll in stock ing 67.2 s mor . In e 4 3* 9 9* 8 7* 14* 16 Health problem** Traditional * 27 33 34 33 28 31 27 24 public policy research and education on economic security and employee benefit issues. See Craig Copeland, “Employment-Based Retirement and Pension Plan Participation: Geographic Differences and Trends, 2011,” EBRI CDHP or an HSA-eligible plan last year (Fronstin 2012). whereas fewer than 1 in 5 (18.2 percent) of those with 20 or more years of future eligibility were simulated to run c b partici No p ants working for em High School Diploma ployers with 10 42.8 15.8 ? 10.7 19 employees. Workers 6.4 0.0 24.3 who worked 24.5 25.1 for smaller 18.1 empl 9.8 oyers and wh 1.8 20.6 o 25% or Les a s 26.5 20.5 17.2 10.6 4.4 20.9 16 Industry CDHP HDHP b 9* 4* 9 11* 14 15* 14 10 13 15* 11 13* 24* 13 20* 14* than h contrast, alf of t whithe, eir 401(k) assets in stoc non-Hispanic, family EBRI’s member -hea ks d, increased 401(k ship includes a )-ty with the perceived value pe-plan partic cross-section of ipants had pension funds; businesses; trade associations ofsimilar the de likeli fined hoods benefit ( of bein Figu g re a 6) ll in . Of ves t th ed ; ose Traditional 57 51 53 54 54 51 53 n/a Prior to the 2004 surve HDHP y, very broad general-asset categories 18* 24* were used: 21* 1) mostl 20* y or all in stocks, 25 21* 2) mostl 18* y or all in intere 17* st-earning Issue Brief, ? Gene no. 378 (Emplo rally, the population yee Benefit Research In of adults within both stitute, November 2012). high-deductibl e (HDHP) and traditional health plans have been Fronstin, Paul. "Findings from c the 2012 EBRI/MGA Consumer Engagement in Health Care Survey." EBRI Issue Brief, no. short Hof igh money School Din iplr om etirem a ent. 29.6 Clearly, 21.8 access 17.5 to these 8.1 retirement 4.7 18.3 programs 15.8 can ha 23.0 ve a profou 22.8 nd 11.7 positive 3.4 impa23.3 ct on Rollover b 10.1 21.2 20.0 15.3 3.8 29.6 Source: E CDHP BRI/ Coc mmonwealth Fund Consumerism8 in Health C12 are Survey 11 , 2005–2007; E 13 BRI12 /MGA Consum 12 er Engagem 12 ent i 11 n partici Agriculture, fore pated in a stry plan , had a high er likeliho od of havi ng only a DC plan than those who worked for larger employers. labor unions; health care providers and insurers; government organizations; and service firms. Income Differences HDHP 57 53 55 57 57 54 57 n/a CDHP 20* 24* 20* 23* 28 20* 19* 20 with in eitperc her of eive thd-de e assets fined-be compared nefit valu with es of thos lee ss than $ without 15, a w 0hite 00 afamily nnually, 4 head. 3.5 Tperc he net ent -w ha orth d more percenti than le 5 of 0 percent IRA owner of t sh and eir assets, 3) split between stock and interest-earning assets, and 4) other, although there were small differences in the classifications between This article examines the population with a CDHP and how it differs from the population with traditional health Som split 5 e C0 o– llege 50 between men 22.0 and wom 16.8 en. 23.0 In contrast, differ 11.0 5.7 ences i 21.6n gen 14.1 der have 23.2 been 23.1 found bet 15.3ween 7 consumer .2 17.1 - 379 (Emp Health Clo are S yee u Benefit Rese rvey, 2008–2012.arch Institute, December 2012). No Rollover 32.6 20.3 16.1 8.8 4.6 17.6 financial security in cretirement. and fisheries 200–499 12.5 11.2 12.8 8.1 9.7 9.4 19.4 11.0 13.1 7.7 4 a CDHP Age 35–44 49 44* 46* 45* 49* 46 50 n/a assets in stocks, compare 401 See Craig (k)-type Cop participants eland, “Individual Account ha d d with no clear 49.7 Retirem perc impact ent of ent Plans: An Analy on those being w coith perceiv mple sis of the tely inve e20 d 1 values of s0 Surve ted in y eit of $ h40, Cons er 000 stocks umer Finances,” or mor or inter e annually. est-earni EBRI Issue Brief, Howe ng assets. ver, no. the t CDHP e w C o t oly ln ege pes of rolle DT egr e raccounts. However, in the 2004 s adi s have ee tional =bee heal an th pl more like 17.0 an with no deducti 14.0 ly than traditional bl urve e or < 20.9 y, mo $1,000 (i 14.6 re spec ndi -plan viific al dual 8 .1 enrol ), < location w $2,000 (fam lees 25.5to be as asked for those split betw ily). 11.0 in higher 17.7-income 22.4 house een st 16.5h ocks and i olds i 10.3 n most nterest- 22.0years coverage. Industry Data from t ?Family hea he 2005– ds 20 wh 07 E o worke BRI/Commonw d in public eal admi th Fnistr und Consu ation an md erism in participate Head lth Care Su in a retirement rvey and the 2008– plan had the Source: Employee Benefit Research Institute estimates from the 2010 Survey of Consumer Finances. driven health plan (CDHP) e a nrollees and those with traditional coverage. Traditional 9 8 9 8 10 8 9 9 Mining and construction 40.7 36.7 37.6 30.2 34.2 25.1 35.7 24.0 35.3 28.4 b Obese Traditional EBRI’s work advances knowledge and unders 26 23 22 23 23 tanding of emplo 23 24 yee benefits and their 24 a Race HDHP = high-deductible health plan with deductible $1,000+ (individual), $2,000+ (family), no account. 375 (Emplo Seyee B c. 401(enefit Research I k) plans car b e combined w nstitute, September 2012 ith Sec. 403(b) plans, T). h rift Savings Plan, and Supplemental Retirement Annuities. earning assets. T partici of the survey. pants with perceived-DB val In fact, herefore, the r the C esults prior to 2004 DHP populatio ues of lenss than are not direct was more $15,000 ann lik ly comparable ely than ually tra w d iwere the leas th t itio he results from t nal-plan enro t likely he this stud llees to to be i be yn , but in vested i households because the res n all in wi terest- th ults 201 To high establish 2 EB est perce RI/McGA Consumer ntage urrent wit savi h a a ngs DB Engagement behavior, plan only, on in at 40. e necessary Health Ca 9 percen re mt in e Sasurement urv 2010, ey are and also ha use of d retirement for the d th ana e preparation high lysis. Diff est percentage wit erenc is identifyin es betwg h een th bot e the h a DB Manufacturing HDHP b 72.5 58.0 6 75.7 8 63.0 7 75.4 7 56.7 7* 69.9 8 8 58.4 10 69.8 57.5 importance to the nation’s economy among policymakers, the news media, and the public. It c Traditional 36 30 27 26 31 29 29 28 b HDHP 25 25 24 24 24 27* 22 24 Endnotes White Non CDHP = co Hispanicnsumer-d21.1 riven health 15.8 plan with20.7 deductibl13.3 e $1,000+ ( 7in .0 dividua22.1 l), $2,000+ ( 12.7 family), w 18.3 ith accou22.9 nt. 15.6 8.6 21.8 Asset Allocatio c n Comparison among Plan Types ?As shown previously, the probabilities of being invested all The joint distribution is the probability that individuals owning both plan types have the various combinations of allocations across the two earnin in this study ? In m g assets o fo st r 2 years 010 have the pe (2.4 perc , CDHP b ent, compared wit enrol rcentage of assets invested in lees were lh es 8. s li 7 percent and 14. kely than stocks reported b those w 4 perc ith tra y q ent). uartiles, a gener ditio nal covera al comparison can be made ge to be between the a ag ges ainst the of 21 $15 Wholesale and retail trade 0,000 or more in CDHP incom c e in 48.7 every yea 33.0 r except 5* 52.4 2009 an 10 33.4 d 20108 (Figure 52.8 7 2).34.8 CDHP 7* enrolle 56.6 7 es w 9 36.5 ere also more 10 50.2 like30.0 ly popul and aa DC tion plan with trad . The n itional ext-highest leve coverage does this b an l of d h participatio igh- y co denducting ducti n in ble heal and p a DBt pl ublishing policy re h an o plan (HDHP) enrol nly (22.6 percent searlch, analysis, ees are ) was amon also examined. and g tspecial reports on hose worki Differ ng i ences n percentage of workers with employment-based retirement plans, as well as understanding the characteristics of HDHP 33 28 30 29 28 27 28 27 5 What we do CDHP 31 32* 31 30 28 36* 30* 27 Nonwhite 19.1 16.8 18.0 8.2 5.9 32.0 14.5 25.4 21.5 12.7 5.4 20.4 * Difference between HDHP/CDHP and Traditional is statistically significant at p = 0.05 or better. See Jesse Bricker, Arthur B. K plans. Consequently, the esum nnickell, of each Keof vin B. the el Moore, and ements in the Joh joint ndi Sabelhaus. “C stribution should hanges be 100 percent. in U.S. Family Finances from 2007 to 2010: in 1 stocks were similar for IRA owners and 401(k)-type-plan participants, but there was a much lower probability of c 500 or more employee benefits issues; holding educational br iefings for EBRI memb ers, congressional and more gene Finance, insura ral categories. See Cra nce, real ig Copeland, “R etirement Plan Pa rticipation and Asset Allocation,” EBRI Notes, no. 1 (Emplo yee Be nefit than tra See Fronstin and dition 34, an al-pl (2012) for mor d t an he C enroll DHP ee e pop s to be i information about HRAs and ulation n ho was mo useholds re like with ly tha $10 HSAs. n0,0 traditiona 00–$149 l-plan ,999 i enroll n inco ees to me since be in 2 house 007 (201 hold 0 is s with an CDHP 26* 30 25 23 23* 22* 25 22* discussed workers transportation Net c Wwith orin t th Per and h , communicati e rem centi Age 45–54 witho leainu der t a ccess of this ons, pu to article blic such util are statisticall programs. ities, an d The pers y si fin onal gni din an ficant. gs d from prof (More in ethis ssional service stud formati y show on abo s. Workers i that uthere t the data ca has n the bewholesal en n be a found in e and The conditional distribution is the probability an individual with a specific 401(k)-type plan allocation (i.e., 75 percent or greater) will have a Evidence from the Survey of Consumer federal agen Finances.” Federal R cy staff, and th eserve e news Bulletin. media; vol. 98, and sponsoring public opinion survey no. 2 (June 2012): 1–80 s on employee a bein estate, and bu g invested Account Ba all siness and in lan inter ce of est-earnin 401(k)-T g ype P assets lan among ?The 4equity distribution within 01(k)-type partici pants. Furt the her accou more, nts of amon family-h g IRA ead, own 401(k ers, t h)ere - Traditional 54 45 43 50 48 52 49 54 Research Institute, Januar Smokes cigarettes y 2004): 1 ?11, for results from the 1992 –2001 Surve ys o f Consumer Fina nc es on asset allo cation from 401( k)- Bottom $150,0 25% 00 or more in Traditional incom 24.0 e in11.9 every yea 29 21.4r exc26 7 ept .8 2009 6.9 27 and 20 28.0 26 10. 17.8 28 25.7 27 19.5 27 9.1 29 6.7 21.3 exce ption). Since 2007, traditional-plan enrollees have been more likely than CDHP enrollees to be in households with the a 2 retail tra ppendix.) de industry had the highest percentage with a DC plan only, at 84.7 percent. significant increase in the percentage of family heads with a DC plan (typically a 401(k)-type plan) over time. each possible IRA allocation. The row should equal 100 percent. See www.mercer.com b/pressrelease/details.htm?idContent=1491670 benefit issues. EBRI’s Education and Re search Fund (EBRI-ERF) performs the charitable, a www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/bulletin/2012/pdf/scf12.pdf for more information on the Survey of Consumer Finances. repair services b 48.1 37.5 48.9 39.6 54.9 39.9 57.3 40.8 54.3 37.5 seemed type partici to be pana ts was simila HDHP significant di r across each fference in the account-balan likeli 33* hood of ce gro 29* being uipi n36 vested ng, with some 38* either al 37* not l inable stocks 41* excor eptio 37* all n in s (Fi in40* terest-e gure 6). arnin Amg ong 25%-49.9%Traditional 18.6 19.2 17.9 23 9.4 24 3.724 31.220 13.118 24.6 15 21.5 15 10.4 14 5.6 24.8 type plans and IRAs. HDHP 34 29 30 29 27 28 33* 30 incomes less than $30,000. Consequently, how participants allocate educationa their l, and DC scientif balanc ic func es among tions of the Instit different asset ute. EBRI cate-ERF gories is a tax-ex could have empt organizatio a considerable n c b Transportation, communications, c CDHP 36* 31* 40 42 48 49 49 53 The per 50%- centa 74.9% ge of HDHP retir emen 25.6 t plan partici 18.4 pants across all 18.7 14* 8.1 18* industries 6.714* 22.5 wh 15* o had a 12.013* DB 21.4 plan only 12 24.2 de 11* clin 16.4 ed si 11* gni 6.6ficantl 19.5 y from assets 401 ? (k)-type CDHP e that wa participants nrolle s related e CDHP s were to wit rou whether h accou ghly twice they nt bala as lik also nces of 34 owned ely as in $28 5a ,00 divid 401(k 0 u30 ual p) to -ty s with $2 pe 0,0 28 pla traditio 00, n (Fi 37.7 g 27 ure nal covera p4). erce 27 For nt ha ge exam t d more o 30 have ple, t colle al han h 30 most ge a23 or post lf of t perc heir ent - of supported b y contributions and grants. 6 c impact on the funds available for these participants in retirement. 17 See Jack VanDerhei, Sarah Holden, Luis Alonso, and Steven Bass, “401(k) Plan A sset Allocat ion, Account Balances, and Loan Acti vity in public utilit 75%-89.9% ies, and personal an 22.0 d 16.0 21.5 12.5 7 .0 21.0 11.1 14.7 23.8 18.2 12.3 19.9 Source CDHP: EBRI/Com monwealth Fund Consumeri 14* sm in 14* Health Car 15* e Survey, 13* 2005–2007; EBR 13* I/MG 9* A Consumer 9* 11* 20 Demographic Differences in the CDHP, HDHP, and Traditional-Plan Populations 199 Results from th 2–2007, but in e EBRI IRA Data Age 55–64 2010, thi sbase for 2010 sh trend moved up owed that 1 ward for 3.1 p some Figur e rcent of IRA o e 3 industries. w One ners had mo industry re thwher an 90 percent e worker allocated to bonds s’ participation in and those account balan gradu who ate did ce not edu inv c oations in ested in stocks, wn a 401 near (k)-type ly all years of t compared with plan were h in e survey. vested at leasall t 40.7 in inter percen est-earning t of those w assets ith, all ot comp her ared bala with nces. just over In general, there have been few income differences between HDHP enrollees and traditional-plan enrollees, and in Engagement in Health Care Survey, 2008–2012. a professional Services Top 10% 15.7 67.7 13.0 53.2 21.3 65.1 18.8 51.2 8.2 23.0 66.9 15.1 51.4 12.8 65.6 21.9 51.5 20.4 61.9 9.0 20.9 47.9 2011,” EBRI Issu No regula e Brief, no. 380 r exercise (Employee Benefit Research Institute, Decem ber 2012) for the latest results from this project. Traditional Educatio 17 n, by T18 ype of Healt 18 h Plan 19 , 2005–2012 21 19 22 24 money (combined) and 37.4 percent to stocks. The EBRI IRA Database has individual level data from IRA recordkeepers on over 10 million DB plans o Gen nly der— a continue Gened t rally, the he down po ward tre pulation o nd f a was th dults withi e finance, i n both nsuranc HDHPs an e, real d tr estate, aditional and healt busin h pl eans hav ss- and r e ebeen pair- split 15 Furthe 201perc 2, th rmore, ent ereo w f 17.9 e those re no percent who statisti did o cally sign fown those EBRI Issue B one. with ifica Additionally, a nt di ccount ffer riefs ebalanc nces. are period amo es ng of icals providing exp IRA $1 owners 00,000 or mor who ert evaluati had e hrollo ad all t ons of emplo ver hassets, eir assets in stocks, y there ee benefit issues and were lower a TheSour March ce: Em Cu ploy rrent ee Traditio Benef Po nal = itpulat Resear heal ion ch th plan Inst Survey i w tutith no e est (CP im dedu ates S), ctib from co le o tnduct he r <$1 2010 ,000 eSur d (iby v ndiv ey the of idual), <$2 Consum U.S. er ,C 000 Fi enances. nsus (familyBurea ). u, has the most up-to -date Figure 6 Public Administration b 88.9 75.2 85.0 74.0 92.3 80.7 91.4 89.0 89.1 82.2 Traditional 24 25 25 25 21 23 24 20 HDHP 24 22 25* 26* 25 24 27* 30* a b accounts. See Cr ? CDHP enraig Copeland, “I ollees have con RA Asset Allocation, 2010,” siste 2005 trends, as well ntly rep2006 orted b as cr eitical analy tte 2007 EB r he RI Notes, alth s2008 es of status than tra no. 10 emplo (Emplo 2009 yee benefit po yee Benefit ditional-plan 2010licies an Research Institute, Octobe 2011 enrollees, d proposals. 2012 exh EBiRI Notes biting bett r 2012 is a ): er services industry: More than 97 percent of these workers had a D3C plan, while just 2.8 percent had only a DB plan. 750–50 Sec. bet 401( wk) e e pln men ans care b an comd bined wow men. T ith Sec. 403( hrou b) g plh ans, out 2 Thri005 ft Sav–2 ings 01 Pl2, abo an, and a ut Suppl 50 emp ent ercent al Retir of tra ement Annui ditional- ties. plan enrollees were male compared likelihoo Our ds wit of h bein at l HDHP = high g east 21.3 perc invested -deduc all tible h in ent o inter ealth pla f est-earnin th nose with with deduct g all iassets ble ot $1,000+ (indiv her and balanc alli dual), $ in e a stocks, m 2,ounts. 000+relative (family ), no to ac those count. IRA participants without c information EBRI is developing a database Source: Employ on ee Benefi HDHP the perc t Re sear enta chof individual ge Instiof tute workers estimates o s who have 401(k) pl with f the 15* 1992 a ret , 19 irem 25 95, 2 ans and IRAs to e004, 2007 nt plan. 20* , an How d 201 21 see e 0 Surv ver, their investment and spend d ey 19 th of Consu e CPS 19 does mer Finan not 21 ces. provi own behavior in de 18 a breakdo these wn of Percentage of Family Head 401(k)-Type Plan Participants in Various Asset Allocation CDHP 15 16 19 19 16* 16 22 22 b monthly periodical providing current information on a variety of employee benefit topics. High S c chool Graduate or Less 8?20 for m Few health er ore inf than behavior than 10 ormation about observcations. tradit the EBRI IRA Dat ional-plan enro abase and result llees with respect to smokin s from it. g and (except for 2010 and 2011), CDHP = consumer-driven health plan with deductible $1,000+ (individual), $2,000+ (family), with account. and 50 percent were female (Figure 1). HDHP enrollees have also been mostly split 50–50 between men and women. Education Differences rollover Note: Employ assets. er Sp CDHP onsor s is de a fined as the percentage of w16* orkers employ 19* ed by an employ 17* er tha 17* t offers a 13* retiremen 20 t plan to any 20 of its em 15* ployees, but not the plans. This database w retirement plan ill include actual records fro Categories by types—defined be Defined Be nefit m record keepe (DB) pe nefit P nsion l rs an S or of these t DC, tatus and A 401(k ypes )of plans that -type ccount Balance, 2010 plans—fo would provide an ex r workers cov tre emel red yby rich sour those ce of White, non-Hispanic Traditional 32% EBRIef is a weekly 38% roundup of 42% 33% EBRI resear 35%ch and 38% insights, as 34% well as updates on survey 30% s, publications * Difference between HDHP/CDHP and Traditional is statistically significant at p = 0.05 or better. exercise, and sometimes obesity rates. a CHECK OUT EBRI’S WEB SITE! b Whe necen it ssarily has the w no orking t be head en a being n even studied. 50–50 split, the differences between HDHP enrollees and the population with Source: EBRI/Commonwealth Fund Consumerism in Health Care Survey, 2005-2007; EBRI/MGA Consumer Engagement in CDHP enrollees were Traditional roughly twice studies, litig as likely as in 71 ation, leg dividual 71 islation an s with 71 d regulati traditio 72 on aff nal covera 70 ecting emplo ge 70 to have yee 69 benefit plans, w college 71 or post hile -gra EBRI’s duate data to anal 18 yze. HDHP plans. Asset Allocation in IRAs and 4 Previous EBRI research established 14* t17* 01(k)-Typ he plan-type 14* breakdow e Plans 13* n for 14* families, 10* using the 12* Survey of11* Consumer All Stock Allocation Conclusion VanDerhei, Holden, Alonso, and Bass (2012), op. cit., found that the percentage of 401(k) participants invested in equities decreased as Health Care Survey, 2008-2011. c b Among 401(k)-type participants, those with or without an IRA had very similar likelihoods of being invested either in Blog supplements our regular publications, offering commentary on questions received from traditional coverage 4 have not been statistically significant (such as in 2012, when 48 percent of the HDHP population CDHPHDHP 94* 83* 78* 77 72 72 74* 74 6* 11* 11* 10* 8* 10* 7* 8* educatio ns in nearly all years of the surve Int yeres (Figu t re 3). I 1% n 2 - 012, 23 26% percent o - f CDH 51%P - enrollees 76% had - graduate degrees, Finances (SCF), a a triennial, interview survey of U.S. families that measures their financial characteristics and status As noted above, the manner in which participants allocate their DC balances among asset categories could have a they became older throu Traditional = gh their 5 health plan 0s w w he ith no n the pe deductib rcentage bega le or <$1,000 (i n to ndiv decrease t idual), <$2,hese o 000 (family ldest participants. ). The percentage of family heads who participated in an employment-based pension or retirement plan remained 8 c news reporters, policymakers, and others. EBRI’s Fundamentals of Employee Benefit Employer Size ?The likelihood of a working family head participating in a retirement plan increased with the all interest-ear b ning assets or in all equities (Figure 4). However, there was a clear difference in the equity selections See Craig Cope Som land, “Retireme e College, CDHP T rade or B nt Plan Pa usirticipatio ness Sc 93* hool n and Asset Allocation, 2007,” 81 75 76 EBRI Notes, 72 no. 11 78 (Emplo 79* yee Be 77* nefit Research Institute, was male Cat egory and 52 percent was female). Earning 25% 50% 75% 99% 100% HDHP = high-deductible health plan with deductible $1,000+ (individual), $2,000+ (family), no Retirement Plan Participation and Asset Allocation, 2010 and 46 percent had college degrees, compared with 16 percent and 26 percent, res , b py ectively, Craig Cop of tr eland aditional , Ph.D., enrol EBRI lees. and EBRI’s website is easy to use and packe is sponsored by the Board of Governors of the Feder Fail gur d with useful information! Look for Reserv e 4 e System in cooperation with the U.S. Department a considerable impact on the funds ultimat Programs ely availa offers a straigh ble for th tforward, basic explan ese participants in r ation of etirememplo ent. T yee ben his secti efit progr on examines ams in the asset basically unchanged from 1992–2001 (around 48 percent) before declining, reaching 44.6 percent in 2010. However, Traditional 31 29 29 31 31 28 30 29 size of his oraccount. her em Minorit ployer. y In 2010, amon g family h eads working for em ployers with 10 ?19 emplo yees, 22.4 percent for those with and without an IRA. Those 401(k) participants with an (perc IRA entwere age) more likely to have 51 percent to November 20 Conc 19 lusio 09)n : 13 ?23. 5 a HDHP e These numbe nrollee rss are determined were b also m b ore like y adding u privat ly tha e and p the n traditio percentages in e publicnal- sectors plan enro ach categor . The llees EBRI Datab y to (51have coll %–75ook on Emplo %, 76% ege o –99r%, and 10 grayee Benef duate 0% d) eits w grees. ith a more th is a st atist an 5 ical0 of the Treasur c y. While the S a CF does not provide the level of detail on asset allocation within 401(k) plans found in Percentage of Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs) and 401(k)-Type Plan Family allocation in 401(k) plans and IRAs, with particular attention to the allocation within these plans for those owning HDHP over that these special features: periCDHP = od, a Traditional dramatic consumer-driv shift oc en healt 36curred in t h plan wi36* t28 h dedu he ty ctible 29 pes o 30 $1,000+ (indiv f plans i 29 28idual), $ n 28 whic 2,26 000+ h these 30 (family fami ), 26 w 30 ith acc ly hea ou29 nt. d 31 s partici 29 pated, 27 as those ? The Fam likeli ily Head hood of a working family hea 13.d 2% participatin 20.g 3% in a retirem 22.5% ent plan incr 14.8% eased with t 7.7% he size o21. f his o 4% r her In contrast, differences in gender have been found between CDHP enrollees and those with traditional coverage. In participated in a plan, compared with 67.2 percent of family heads who worked for employers with 500 or more 99 percent in equities in their account than those without an IRA. Correspondingly, those 401(k) participants without 6 It is very difficult to c generalize the referen differen ce work o ces in n emplo charact yee ben eristics among CDHP efit programs and work force-related issues. enrollees, HDHP enrollees, and percent allocation to stocks in the b IRA. For example, for those with a rollover, 5.3 percent (51%–75%) plus 15.4 percent (76%–99%) plus Head Participants in Various Asset Allocation Categories by Plan Types, 2010 9 the EBRI/ICI Participa CDHP nt-Directed Retirement Plan Data Collection Project, it does allow for the comparison of asset * Difference between HDHP/CDHP and 28 Tradit 33* ional is st 24 atistically s22* ignificant at p 24* = 0.05 or better 25 . 21* 22* both a 40 W1( ith k) Def an ined d IR HDHP BA. enefit Plan 9. 6* 2 17* 15.222* 24 25.0 27 17.0 28 25* 10.8 26 22.8 with Froma D employer. CurB rent P pens opulation Surve In ion fel 201 l s 0, amon harpl y (CPS) dat y, whil g family hea e thos a, the e percentage of d with s woa DC rking for em 4a 0ll w 1(k) orkers participa -type ployers with 1 plan grew ting in an empl 0–1 by9 employe more o ythan ment-based retir es, 20 22. perc 4 perce entage ement nt poi plan w part nts icipat as . ed employees. 2005, 2006, a Frnd om 19 2009, t 92–20 her 0e w 7, the ere like no stat lihood of istically sign retireme ifint pl cant differenc an particip eation fel s between C l for family DHP enrollees and those wit heads who worked foh r the an IRA were more likely to have 1 percent to 50 percent in equities in their account than those with an IRA. Health St indivi • duals EBRI’s entire lib witatus Differences h traditional c crary of research publicat overage, but a few differenc ions starts at the m es stand out. ain Web page. Click on EBRI 55.7 percent (100%) equals 76.4 percent. College Graduate or Some Graduate Work allocations Without within Def40 ined 1(k B) enef -type it Plplans an when 13. controllin 9 All g for 21.the 1 existenc 22. e 1of St other ock A 14. ltax loc5 a -tqualifi ion ed 7. retir 3 ement plans 21.2 (such as ** Arthritis; asthma CDHP , emphysema or lung di7* sease; cance 19 r; depression 25 ; diabe 24 tes; hear28 t attack or other hear 22 21* t disease; 21* high 41.9 percent in 2004 before declining to 39.7 percent in 2006, rising to 41.5 percent in 2007, and declining to 39.7 percent by 2011. These in a plan, comparaed with 67.2 percent of family heads who worked for employers with 500 or more employees. traditional coverage. However, in 2007 and 2008, CDHP enrollees were more likely than those with traditional smallest employers (fewer than 10 Contact EBRI employees and Publications, (2 10–19 employees 02) 659-0670; ), as it di fax publication d for those worki orders to ng for the (202) 775-6312. largest 13 chole Tradit steirol; or onal hypertension, hig 24h blood pre 22 ssure, or stro 20ke. 7 24 23 22 24 26 Issue Briefs and EBRI Notes for our in-depth and nonpartisan periodicals. Head/Perc Reeived tirement Value Planof T y Def peined Benefit P Inlan terest 1%- 26%- 51%- 76%- In classifying where IRA and 401(k)-type plan owners invest their assets, the SCF asks if the assets in these plans With the exception o Source f 20 : EBRI/Com 07, the m survey ha onwealth Fund C s never onsumeri foun sm in d Hea difflere th Car nces i e Survn e yself-re , 2005–2007; EBR ported health I/MGA Consumer status between HDHP Due to DB pensions the inc areased nd indivi partic dual ir pe ation tirement in DC acc plans, the ounts (IRAs)). manner in which participants allocate assets within these plans b CPS levels are expected to b 20 e lower than t Subscriptions to he results for just EBRI family heads in this stud Issue Briefs are included y, as the as part of CPS results include younger EBRI membership, or as part of workers and a Asset Allocation between Plan Types ?One question that arises when studying the asset allocation in one employers In most years coverage to b (5 *** Heal 0 HDHP e 0 of the survey, or mor male, th problem an e d b em defined etwee ployees). both th an 20 s fair e C How or 10 and 20 p Door heal He Pver, it anth d HD or 12, incr one CD H of eigh e Pa HP populations sed for en t chroni rol those lees c heal wer were th co working enditi less lik more ons. for lik ely to mi ely than d-siz be youn e those em ploy g with (ages 21 ers (20– tra d - ition 49 349 ) t al han These number s are determined and Engagement in Other Fact He or byalth Ca adding u 34re Sp the urvey35* E percentages in e , 2008–2012 arning 40* . 25% ach categor 42* 50% y (51 42* %–75%, 76% 75% 45* –99%, and 10 99% 42* 0%) w 100 42* ith a more th % an 50 Less than $15,000 annually 2.4 22.9 31.1 26.1 6.0 11.5 Orders/ were enrollees an invested i d: n divi 1) all in duals stoc with ks, traditional 2) all in int coerest-ear verage. In co ning a ntssets, or 3) sp rast, in seven out o lit. If the resp f eight years of t ondent ah ne s swu ered “split,” th rvey (2009 was e c could ? In have 2010 a s , 18 igni .9 ficant percen effec t of f t upon ami $199 annual sub ly th he e f ad in s ancial r who p scription a erti sourc cip to ated es they EB in an RI Not ultima em es ploy and tely wi E ment-based re BRI Issue ll have availabl Briefs tirement . Change of e in re pla tirement. Address: n had aTh defi EBRI, e ned a spouses w • Visit EBRI’s blog, or subscribe to the EBRI ith a lower likelihood of a strong attachment to the work force. See Copela ef e-letter. nd (November 2012), op. cit., for further results from specific plan sCDHP uch as an IRA or a 401(k)-type plan is whether the owner may be investing in a completely different, Traditional = health plan 46* with no dedu 41*ctible or <$1 41*,000 (i ndiv 44* idual), <$2 (per 46* ,000 centa (family ge)). 44* 48* 46* coverage$15, to be f 000 e up male. to $40, Spe 000 cifically, annually 44 percent o 8.7 f CDHP 22. enroll 8 ees wer 21.e 2 male an16. d 56 1 percent 7.wer 7 e female 23. in 5 2012, employees percent allocation to stocks in the the population ). Similarly, i with trad n 2 ition 010, t 401(k)-t al covera he y likeli pe ge. plan. hood of There pl wer an e no participation statistically significant increased for diff wor ere kers at em nces in the plo po yers with rtion ag 10–19 es 45 -54 14 This article builds upon that research to examine the plan-type breakdown by the characteristics of the participating 1100 13th St. NW, Suite 878, Washington, DC, 20005-4051, (202) 659-0670; fax number, percentage in stocks was then asked. The results of the asset allocation of family heads within IRAs and 401(k)- the exception), it was found that CDHP enrollees were more likely than traditional-plan enrollees to report excellent or distribution of participants invested in each proportion of stocks was found not to vary significantly with age between benefit Graduat (D IRB) p As b e Degree lan only, while 65.0 perce 20.8 nt % had a d 15 e.9% fined contributio 20.3% n (DC) pla 12.6% n only, and 6.9% the rema 23.5%ining CPS. Subscriptions $40,000 or more annually 14.4 8.9 27.0 12.3 11.8 25.6 With and potent respect t ially o HDHP inconsistent, HDHP = high and tr -ded aditional manne uctible h r - in ealth pla plan another enrolle n with deduct plan es, ther or iblei $1 ne w his/her ,000+ (indiv ere no stat othe idual), $ r istically sign asset 2,000+hol (family dinifi ), gs. n cant diff o Figureerenc 5 presents es in th the e o joi bes nt e employees and unchan no r ge ecent d but fro m decr statistically significant 2011. eased for workers diff at all ere other nces in employer sizes. the portion ages 5 5 -64. In 2006, 2010, and 2011, the CDHP (202) 775-6312; e-mail: subscriptions@ebri.org Membership Information: Inquiries a • EBRI’s reliable health and retirem a ent surveys are just a click away through the topic boxes at family heads’ employers and discusses the types of results that are incorporated in RSPM related to participation in very goo type plans d h ae re a T compare l rth adit Waccount. i(Fi th ional 401 gure 4). (d k)-acr Typ o Furthermore, i e ss P demogra lan131 phic cate n11 fiv 5.1e of th gori9e es 12.6 ei and ty ght ye121 pes ars of 18. of4 t ph lans11 e survey own 15.6 e (2001 d by 06, perc 20 82 .9 enta 07, 20 ge o 0 8f29.1 , 2 as6 5 0s1 e1 ts , an inves d ted ages 16.1 35– Head/ 64, pe A al rcent cc though ount h B ad alanc hi both a gher e educational DB and a DC attainment, plan. This inc was a ome, si an gnif d n icant et worth change were co from 199 rrelated 2, whwith en 42. more investm 3 percent ha ent i d a n percentage in distribution of any years o family heads f t ’ h inves e survey tments an d no r in IRAs e cent and di 40 ff1erences (k)-type in plex ans ercise. Howev for those owenr, in ing both all ye types ars of the of plans survey . Note regarding EBRI membership and/or contributions to EBRI-ERF should be directed to EBRI b population was more like c ly than the popu a lation with traditional coverage to be ages 35 -44. CDHP enrollees had 10 15,16 Without a 401(k)-Type Plan 22.8 17.1 21.0 11.5 6.2 21.5 employment the top of the page. -based HDHP retirement plans and the asset allocations in DC plans and IRAs. In addition, the article updates CDHP = consumer-driv 16 en health plan 12 with dedu 17* ctible $1,000+ (indiv 17* idual), $ 18* 2,000+ (f 18* amily), with acc 17* ount. 18 in stocks, with A decline Les ws as f then a ound in the result particula $5,000 r focus on th s from CPS for 2 e inv 15. e 007 to 2010 sting 6 patter (Co 25. npeland, Novemb s of those 9 wit 17.8h er 2012 both IRAs a ), op. cit. Furthe 14.0 nd 401(k rmore 4.)7-type plans. , a decrease in 22.1 2012), CDHP enrollees were less likely to report being in fair or poor health, though the actual differences were small. stocks. Taken together, this suggests that, even with increased experience, availability, and use of these types of DB plan only, and 40.8 percent President Dallas had a DC plan Salisbur only. y at th e above address, (202) 659-0670; e-mail: salisbury@ebri.org Marital Status and Children—In 2006–2009 and 2011–2012, HDHP enrollees were less likely to be married Industry ?cFamily heads who worked for employers in public administration or manufacturing had the highest exce that pt 2 13.2 01 perc 0, HDHP e ent of these nrolle in esdividuals were less l owini kely than ng both tra plad niti s o allocate nal-plana enro ll thellees to ir assets report in ea ch that they plan to smoked. stocks, while 5.8 per- 8 higher income than W*ith Di tradit fR feo renc llove e ion be r tal-pl ween HDHP/ an enroll CDHP and ees in most y 18 Tradit .5 ional e is st 15.7 ars of th atisticallye survey, and CDHP signi 21. fi6 cant at p = 0 1.4.7 05 or better and H . 8.5 DHP enro 21. llees h 0 ave CDHP 20* 15 24* 24* 21* 21* 24* 23* $5,000 up to $20,000 13.6 24.9 23.8 10.5 5.9 21.3 previous EBRI research on these topics with results from the 2010 SCF. participation among private-sector workers was found from the National Compensation Survey conducted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics plans, there remains a need for more financial education of participants. than those wit • Need a number? Check out the h traditional coverage. Similarly, in EBR 2006– I Databook on Employee Benefits. 2007 and 2009, CDHP enrollees were less likely to be married proba cent al blocate ility of apartici ll W the ithout ip r atin assets Rolg i lovn er i a r n both etirem plans ent pla to 2inter 1 n.9 , west-ear hile th 16.1 ose workin ning assets. 19. g i 7 n agriculture, 11.6 forestry, and fi 6.1 sheries ha 24.7 d the Source: EBRI/Commonwealth Fund Consumerism in Health Care Survey, 2005–2007; EBRI/MGA Consumer Engagement in consistently re $20,000 ported hi up to $50, gher 000 education leve 10. ls than tr 4 aditio 19.1 nal-plan enrol 25.9 lees. 14.4 6.9 23.3 CDHP e Editorial Bo nrolle Demogra e ard: s exhi Dallas L phic bit mor Characteristics . Salisbur e healt y, publisher h-consci ?Accordin ; Stephen Blakely ous be g t havior t o the SCF, , editor han . Any am indivi views ong I dual expr R s with A owners, 23.5 percent ha essed in this p traditio ublicat nal covera ion and th ge. ose o d th In all f their as e author years o sets s sho f u the ld during this time. See ? Asset allocatio www n wit .bls.gov hin a /ncs/ncspubs.ht family head’s m for results of t retirement plan he various seems to be a years of the National C ffected by h ompensation Sur is or her ownershi vey. p of other a Heal 40 th C 1(k a)re S -Tyu pe rvey Pl, 2008–2012. an 13.2 20.3 22.5 14.8 7.7 21.4 than those with traditional coverage. HDHP enrollees were less likely than traditional-plan enrollees to be parents in lowest likelihood of participation in 2010. Among workers in public administration, 82.2 percent participated in a plan, not be $50, ascribed to the officers, Age— 000 It is up ofte to $100, n assumed th 000 trustees, m at CDHP embers, or 12.9 enro other sponsors of the E llees are 16.7 more likely tha m21. ploye 7 e Benefit Research n thos 16. e w 1 ith tra Institute, the EBRI Educ d17 itio 9.0 nal covera23. ge7 tation and o be a invested Employer Size Diffe • Instan all in stocks and 2 tly get e-m0 ail noti rences .8 percent ?cations of the latest EB were invested in all interest-e RI data, arning surveys, publications, and m assets in 2010. Among 401(k) eetings -type-plan survey, CDHP enrollees were less likely than those with traditional coverage to report that they smoked. Similarly, In addition to Trdemogra aditional = heal phic th pl fan w actors relate ith no deducti d blto family e or <$1,000 (i hea ndid vidual s, asset alloca ), <$2,000 (famtion w ily). ithin a family head’s retirement plan types of retirement With IRA plans. Those who ow 14.2 n an IRA ar 14.7 e more like 19.l6 y to be investe 18.9 d all 11.1 in stocks if t 21. he 5y also own a Research Fund, or their staffs. Nothing herein is to be construed as an attempt to aid or hinder the adoption of any pending legislation, regulation, Retireme The bottom portion nt Plan Participation of Figure 5 looks at the conditional probability of the investment allocation in the IRA, given a $100,000 or more 13.7 14.8 22.5 19.3 11.7 17.9 CDHP e compared wit 200 11 6, 200 nrolle 7, 2 e h 009, s have co 7.7 percent of 2011, nsistently re and 2 work 012. In ers porte co in agricult d ntrast, the better h ure, fo ealth diffrestry, erences status than tra and in tfis heh likeli eries. ditional hood -plan of bein enrollees, g parents exh betw ibiting bett een CDH er P an health d young, beca buse they use less health care, on average. However, that is generally not what has been found in these These sponsorship rates and levels of participation cannot be used to calculate “participation rates” (percentage of retirement-plan-eligible HDHP Wi = high-deductible health plan w thout IRA ith deductible $1,000+ 12.9 22.5 (individual), $2,000+ (fam 23.7 ily), no account. 13.2 6.4 21.4 partici duringp 20 ants, 21.4 and sem 05–2009 inars by clicking on the “Notify Me” or perc and ent 201 were i 2 (but n not vested al in 20l in 10 a stocks, nd 2011 but ), CDHP only 13.2 “RSS” buttons at the top of our ho enrol per lee cs wer ent were e less li invested a kely to re ll iport n inte that they rest-ear me page. nin did g not or interpretative rule, or as legal, accounting, actuarial, or other such professional advice. seems to be a In the 401(k)-type of pla earlier years of t ffected by he s n. Those his urvey (20 or her who o own 05w e –rship o n 2009 a DB ), t f pla ot he C her ty n an DH d P po pes of retir a 401(k pulatio )-type e n m was more eplan nt plans. are likel less likely to allocat Tho y than t se whohe own po a pulation ne IRA their D are mor with C plan e to Source: Employee Benefit Research Institute estimates from the 2010 Survey of Consumer Finances certain amount of stock investment in the 401(k)-type plan. Of those investing more than 75 percent of their assets in c traditional-plan enrollees prior to 2010 and in 2011 were not statistically significant. behavior In 2010, than accor d traditional ing to the -pla SCn F, enro 58.0 llees percen with t respect to of working smoking a family head nd (e s worked xcept for for 20 em 10 pl and 2 oyers that 011), sp ex onsored ercise, an an d surveys. In most years, CDHP enrollees were less likely than those with traditional coverage to be between the ages CDHP = co Source: Em nsu plm oy e e re -dB rive enn ef h ite R aes lthea plr a cn h w Ins ith t d itut ed e u es ctib tim lea $ tes 1,0 f0 ro 0m + ( tih ne di20 vid 1u 0a S l)u , $ rv2 ey ,0 0 o0 f + ( Cofa ns m um ily)e , w r Fith in a ancco ces u.nt. workers a who participate in the plan), as the sponsorship rate in this study includes any worker who works for an employer that sponsors a assets (Figure 3). Furthermore, the percentage of 401(k)-type-plan participants with each level of stock allocation was regularly exer Sec. 401( cise. In k) plans car four e com ye bars of t ined with S he e sur c. 403( vbey (2005, ) plans, Thrift S 20 avings P 09, 20 lan, and S 10, and upplem 201e 2), ntal Retirem CDHP e enrolle nt Annuities. es were less likely to have traditional likely to be cov inve ested a rage to ll i have n stothat covera cks if they als ge o through own a sma 401(ll employers (b k)-type of plane . T tween hose w two ho ow and n4 a DB 9 employe plan es) (Fi and a 40 gur 1( e 5). k)-t ype all interest-earning assets. 9 a stocks in their 401(k)-type plan, 49.1 percent invested all of their assets in stocks in their IRA, and 65.3 percent had Sec. 401 (k) plans care co mbined with Sec. 403(bThere’s lo ) plans, Thrift Sats more! vings Plan, an d Supplemental Retirement Annuities. sometimes obesity rates. H employment * Diffe -based renceret beitw rement een HDHP/CDHP a DHP e plan, nrolle ann es have d d T 44.6 raditioperc also bee nal is sta ent tistica ofn cons workin lly signistently ifica g n famil t at p less likely t y = 0.05 or better. heads part han ici those pated in with one tra (Figure ditional1). covera This ge of 21 EBR an I No d 3 tes 4. is In register 2006 ed in the U. , 2010, an S. Patent and T d 2011, the rade CD mark Office. HP pop Iu Slati SN: on 1085 was more ?4452 1085 lik ?el 4452/9 y than 0 $ . th 50+. e p5o 0p ulation with traditional plan regardless of his or her eligibility status. For participation-rate trends from the SCF, see Copeland, (September 2012), op. cit. gene beenrally obese. high er than that of IRA owners. plan are also less likely to allocate their DC plan to all interest-earning assets. Furthermore, those family heads who Visit EBRI on-line today: www.ebri.org ebri.org ebri.org ebri.org ebri.org ebri.org ebri.org ebri.org ebri.org ebri.org ebri.org ebri.org ebri.org ebri.org No No No No No No No No No No No No Nottttttttttttte e e e e e e e e e e e es s s s ss s s s s s s s • April 2013 • Vol. 34, No. 4 • April 2013 • Vol. 34, No. 4 • April 2013 • Vol. 34, No. 4 • April 2013 • Vol. 34, No. 4 • April 2013 • Vol. 34, No. 4 • April 2013 • Vol. 34, No. 4 • April 2013 • Vol. 34, No. 4 • April 2013 • Vol. 34, No. 4 • April 2013 • Vol. 34, No. 4 • April 2013 • Vol. 34, No. 4 • April 2013 • Vol. 34, No. 4 • April 2013 • Vol. 34, No. 4 • April 2013 • Vol. 34, No. 4 11 13 16 18 17 10 9 3 6 2 8 7 4 © 2013, Employee Benefit Research Institute ?Education and Research Fund. All rights reserved. A monthl y newsletter from the EBRI Education and Research Fund © 2013 Employee Benefit Research Institute ebri.org Notes • April 2013 • Vol. 34, No. 4 ebri.org Notes • April 2013 • Vol. 34, No. 4 ebri.org Notes • April 2013 • Vol. 34, No. 4 14 15 5 Figure 2 Retirement Plan Type of Family Head Participants by Employer Size and Industry, 1992, 1995, 2004, 2007, and 2010 1992 1995 2004 2007 2010 a b a b a b a b a b DB DC Both Any DB DC Both Any DB DC Both Any DB DC Both Any DB DC Both Any a b b a b b a b b a b b a b b DB DC DC DB DC DC DB DC DC DB DC DC DB DC DC Only Only Only Only Only Only Only Only Only Only (percentage) All 42.3% 40.8% 17.0% 57.8% 27.2% 56.2% 16.1% 72.3% 25.8% 56.3% 18.0% 74.2% 18.1% 63.5% 18.5% 82.0% 18.9% 65.0% 16.1% 81.1% Employer Size Fewer than 10 employees 34.2 56.4 9.4 65.8 45.7 49.6 4.7 54.3 30.1 63.8 6.2 70.0 10.0 86.1 3.8 90.0 15.3 77.1 7.5 84.7 10 to 19 63.0 30.1 7.0 37.1 31.2 64.7 4.1 68.8 18.2 73.5 8.3 81.8 6.9 91.8 1.4 93.1 13.3 77.7 9.0 86.7 20 to 99 38.0 54.6 7.4 62.0 26.8 64.3 8.8 73.1 20.1 69.9 10.0 79.9 15.3 73.7 11.0 84.7 14.2 78.2 7.6 85.8 100 to 499 44.4 44.0 11.6 55.6 23.2 63.6 13.2 76.8 30.2 54.9 15.0 69.8 20.6 66.3 13.2 79.4 17.4 70.3 12.3 82.6 500 or more 41.6 36.8 21.6 58.4 28.1 52.2 19.7 71.9 25.9 51.6 22.6 74.1 18.8 58.0 23.2 81.2 20.8 59.5 19.7 79.2 Industry Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries 29.8 70.2 0.0 70.2 43.8 56.2 0.0 56.2 25.8 60.4 13.8 74.2 17.3 82.7 0.0 82.7 12.3 65.6 22.1 87.7 Mining and Construction 42.6 43.9 13.5 57.4 31.5 60.6 7.9 68.5 28.3 57.6 14.1 71.7 24.2 61.8 14.0 75.8 15.9 67.0 17.1 84.1 Manufacturing 34.5 43.5 22.0 65.5 22.3 60.9 16.8 77.7 19.6 64.8 15.7 80.5 6.2 78.2 15.6 93.8 8.8 76.9 14.4 91.2 Wholesale and Retail Trade 26.5 61.2 12.3 73.5 18.7 69.8 11.5 81.3 9.7 75.5 14.8 90.3 10.6 81.3 8.1 89.4 6.4 84.7 8.9 93.6 Finance, Insurance, Real Estate, and Business and Repair Services 28.0 48.5 23.5 72.0 18.1 58.0 23.9 81.9 17.0 67.4 15.6 83.0 8.3 71.8 19.9 91.7 2.8 80.3 16.9 97.2 Transportation, communications, public utilities, and personal and Professional Services 50.3 35.6 14.1 49.7 30.1 55.4 14.5 69.9 29.0 54.6 16.4 71.0 20.4 61.4 18.3 79.6 22.6 62.5 14.9 77.4 Public Administration 60.2 23.4 16.4 39.8 48.9 29.4 21.7 51.1 46.8 18.3 35.0 53.2 37.7 28.5 33.8 62.3 40.9 32.9 26.2 59.1 Source: Employee Benefit Research Institute estimates of the 1992, 1995, 2004, 2007, and 2010 Survey of Consumer Finances. a Defined benefit. b Defined contribution. Note: The 2004 SCF revised the retirement plan identification variables, so the time series should be used with caution. ebri.org Notes • April 2013 • Vol. 34, No. 4 12